Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. by means of this petition, moved under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, 1973, (for short cr.p.c.) the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no. 1388 of 2005, state v. gabbar singh rawat and ors., relating to offences punishable under section 498a i.p.c. and one punishable under section dowry prohibition act, 1961, pending in the court of judicial magistrate, kashipur.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit.3. brief facts of the case are that the petitioner no. 3-vipin singh rawat, got married to respondent no. 2-meena rawat on 05.12.2000. after the marriage, respondent no. 2 started living with her husband in kalagarh. however, it is alleged by the complainant/respondent no. 2 that the petitioners demanded dowry and on its non fulfilment, she was subjected to cruelty. she has pleaded in the first information report that she was forced to leave her husband's house when she was pregnant. on 21.09.2001, she delivered a female child at her parental house. it is pleaded that after some talks of compromise, she was taken in the year 2002 to her husband's house but again subjected to cruelty and forced to leave said house on 16.02.2003, and thereafter she is living in her parental house at kashipur. on the basis of said first information report (copy annexure-1 to the petition) a crime no. 1959 of 2005, was registered and after investigation, impugned charge-sheet was .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
b.c. kandpal, j.1. this appeal, preferred under section 374 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the cr.p.c.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.09.2002 passed by learned sessions judge, bageshwar in sessions trial no. 2 of 2002 whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted under section 302 of indian penal code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as i.p.c.) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.2. prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant - kaustubanand joshi r/o village lesani, patwari circle banlekh, district bageshwar moved an application on 15.12.2001 to naib tehsildar, bageshwar alleging therein that his brother-in-law ramesh chandra pant (appellant) murdered his sister smt. sobha pant at about 09:00 a.m. in a room. it was further alleged that on receiving the information he went to the patwari who was not available so the application was moved to the naib tehsildar, bageshwar. the first information report (ext. ka. 1) was endorsed with the order to the patwari, banlekh for taking necessary action. accordingly, the check f.i.r. (ext. ka. 6) was written on 15.12.2001 at 04:00 p.m. and thereafter the case was registered against the accused - ramesh chandra pant for the offence punishable under section 302 of i.p.c. sri ramesh ram - patwari of that area inspected the spot and prepared the site plan (ext. ka. 12). the room of occurrence was got opened and the accused was arrested from that room. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. by means of this petition, moved under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short cr.p.c.), the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no. 120 of 2004 state v. ram singh vishnoi and ors. relating to offences punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473 and 120b i.p.c., pending in the court of civil judge, jr. div./judicial magistrate, kashipur.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit on record.3. brief facts of the case are that on 09.09.1991, a first information report (annexure-1) was lodged by chief cane officer of kisan co-operative sugar mill, nadehi, against the three accused namely dharamveer, vinod kumar (resident of meerpur), and vinod kumar (resident of malakpur), in respect of offences punishable under sections 408, 420, 467 and 468 i.p.c., which pertains to fabrication and forgery of cane slips, relating to payment of cane price to cane growers. after investigation of said first information report, on the basis of which crime no. 239 of 1991, was registered, charge-sheet in question was filed against the petitioner-rams singh vishnoi. a separate charge-sheet appears to have been filed against other accused including those named in the first information report.4. learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this court to annexure-4 to the petition, which is copy of order, passed by joint cane commissioner, refusing the sanction for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. this is recall/restoration application mcrc no. 191 of 2010, moved on behalf of the petitioners for restoration of criminal misc. application (c-482) no. 287 of 2003, which was dismissed for non prosecution on 25.02.2010.2. heard and perused the affidavit, filed with the application.3. in view of the principle of law laid down in madhumilan syntex ltd. v. union of india and ors. 2007 air scw 1971, and considering the explanation, given in the affidavit, filed with the restoration application, the restoration application is allowed on the condition that the parties shall argue the petition under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short cr.p.c.), today itself. the order dated 25.02.2010, is recalled accordingly and heard learned counsel for the parties on the petition under section 482 cr.p.c.4. by means of this petition, moved under section 482 cr.p.c., the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no. 2455 of 2003, state v. dheer singh and five ors., relating to offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 409, 120b i.p.c., pending in the court of additional chief judicial magistrate, roorkee.5. brief facts of the case are that when respondent no. 3-additional sub-divisional magistrate, on receiving information, inspected the spot, found that the food grain, which was meant for distribution under the scheme-'kaam ke badle anaj' was found being sold to private persons, who were set to take the goods from the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. by means of this petition, moved under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short cr.p.c.), the petitioner has sought quashing of the charge-sheet dated 02.11.2000, relating to offences punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 120b i.p.c. and one punishable under section 13(1)(c)(d) and section 13(2) of prevention of corruption act, 1988, pending in the court of civil judge, jr. div./judicial magistrate, kashipur.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit on record.3. brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged by chief cane officer of kisan co-operative sugar mill, nadehi, against three persons namely dharamveer, vinod kumar (resident of meerpur) and vinod kumar (resident of malakpur), in respect of offences punishable under sections 408, 420, 467, 468 i.p.c. it is complained in the first information report that large number of forged cane slips were found to have been fabricated in connection with payment of cane price to the farmers. after investigation, charge-sheet in question was filed not only against said three named accused, but some other accused including the present petitioner.4. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that civil judge, jr. div./judicial magistrate, has no jurisdiction to try a case relating to offence punishable under section 13 of prevention of corruption act, 1988. it is further pleaded that the petitioner had .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. this revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.07.2001, passed by sessions judge, nainital, in criminal appeal no. 22 of 2000, whereby the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court (chief judicial magistrate, nainital) vide his order dated 12.09.2000, passed in criminal case no. 734 of 1991, against the revisionist, in respect of offence punishable under section 60 / 72 of the u.p. excise act, 1910, is affirmed.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. prosecution story, in brief, is that in the intervening night of 16th and 17th of march 1991, sub inspector kamal ram arya (p.w. 1), constable gopal singh (p.w. 2) along with constables ranveer singh and nandan singh, at about 02:40 a.m., checked the vehicle make dcm toyota, bearing registration no. usz / 9458 coming from haldwani, near jeolikot barrier. it was found that in said truck in 73 white bags and 07 jute bags, country made liquor was being transported illegally. driver of the vehicle namely prem singh and another person jeevan singh (present revisionist) were arrested by the police and the goods were seized, after preparing the recovery memo (ext. a -1). the crime was investigated by sub inspector pooran chandra pandey (p.w. 4), who after completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet against the accused prem singh and the present revisionist jeevan singh. it appears that accused prem singh died during trial and the trial as against him .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. by means of this petition, moved under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short cr.p.c), the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no. 2387 of 2002 state v. dr. bhopal singh and ors. relating to offences punishable under section 498-a of i.p.c. and one punishable under section 3/4 of dowry prohibition act, 1961, pending in the court of additional chief judicial magistrate, kashipur.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit.3. brief facts of the case are that petitioner no. 3 sanjay singh got married to kiran d/o raghubir singh gahlot (respondent no. 2/complainant) on 06.05.2001, in lucknow. the respondent no. 3 lodged a first information report on 06.08.2002, with outpost nadehi, police station jaspur, complaining that his son-in-law (petitioner no. 3) and his parents dr. bhopal singh (petitioner no. 1) smt. urmila (petitioner no. 2) were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage. it is further alleged they demanded a 'maruti' car and also insisted that a plot be purchased at muradabad for the petitioner no. 3. on non fulfilment of demand of dowry, the complainant no. 1 was subjected to cruelty. meanwhile on 18.02.2002, a son (named dhanu), born out of the wedlock, it is alleged by the complainant that the accused physically assaulted not only kiran but also son dhanu at lucknow. the police, after investigation, submitted a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. this revision is directed against judgment and order dated 24.01.2002, passed by additional sessions judge/fast track court, kashipur in criminal case no. 18 of 2000, whereby, said court has affirmed the conviction of the revisionist relating to offence punishable under section 409 of i.p.c but reduced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of rs. 5000/-.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. prosecution story in brief is that the revisionist was employed with krishak seva sehkari samiti . the amount of rs. 9,638/- was collected by him in discharge of this public function,against the goods sold but the same was not deposited in the public account and as such he misappropriated the same. when he was directed to deposit said amount and failed, a first information report was lodged with police station kashipur against him in respect of offence punishable under section 409 i.p.c. after investigation a charge sheet was filed. the magistrate concerned after giving necessary copies to the accused, framed charge of offence punishable under section 409 of i.p.c in response to which he (revisionist) pleaded not guilty claimed to be tried. on this prosecution got examined pw1 girish chandra joshi and pw2 k.c. tiwari. after hearing the parties the trial court found the accused guilty of charge of offence punishable under section 409 of i.p.c. after hearing on sentence the trial court sentenced the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
prafulla c. pant, j.1. this revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 20th of october 2001, passed by the sessions judge, almora, in criminal appeal no. 08 of 1998, whereby said court has affirmed the conviction and sentence recorded against the revisionist anil kumar by the trial court (chief judicial magistrate, almora), in criminal case no. 855 of 1994, relating to offence punishable under section 7/16 of the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 (for short p.f.a. act).2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. brief facts of the case are that complainant p.w. 1 hem chandra joshi, food inspector, nagar palika parishad, almora, took sample of 'besan ka laddu' from the shop of revisionist anil kumar, situated in thana bazar, almora, on 24.02.1994. he got served notice in form no. vi (ext. a -1) to the revisionist before taking sample in the presence of witness mohan singh. the food inspector purchased 600 gms. of 'besan ka laddu' on payment of rs. 30/- to the revisionist. after making the purchase, he filled the 'laddu' in containers in three equal parts and got the containers sealed. on each of the three containers, he marked over the label code no. a.l.m. 28 -/94. he obtained the signatures of the revisionist on the label in the manner proscribed under the rules. thereafter, he sent from no. vii (ext. a -3), and the sample to the public analyst, lucknow, for analysis. the public analyst vide his report no. 3683, dated .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
b.c. kandpal, j.1. this petition under section 482 cr.p.c. has been filed by the applicants/petitioners for quashing the proceedings of criminal case no. 4346 of 2005, state v. mahesh joshi and anr. under sections 148(a), 323, 506 of i.p.c. and section 3/4 dowry prohibition act pending in the court of judicial magistrate, c.b.i., dehradun.2. brief facts of the case are that petitioner no. 1 mahesh joshi got married to respondent no. 2 meeta joshi on 28.06.2004 as per hindu rites and customs. respondent no. 2 lodged the first information report against the applicant no. 1 and his family members on 23.07.2004 with the allegation that they have harassed and tortured her for non-fulfillment their demand of dowry. it has further alleged that they demanded a motorcycle and rs. 20.00 lakhs for fulfilling their demand of dowry. on the basis of the first information report a case crime no. 62 of 2004, under sections 498-a, 323 and 506 of i.p.c. and section 3/4 dowry prohibition act was registered at police station basant vihar, district dehradun. after completing the investigation of the case, the police submitted the chargesheet against the applicants in the court of judicial magistrate, c.b.i., dehradun. thereafter, a criminal case no. 4346 of 2005 was registered against the applicants under the aforesaid sections.3. feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the applicants have preferred this petition for quashing the proceedings under the aforesaid case.4. heard sri r.p. nautiyal, .....
Tag this Judgment!