Uttaranchal Court April 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vikram Singh Bisht Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. The petitioner claims to have been inducted into the service of the Forest Department as Forest Range Officer in 1968. It is the claim of the petitioner that he was appointed as Forest Range Officer after his selection by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. On account of his satisfactory work and conduct, the petitioner was confirmed against the post of Forest Range Officer vide order dated 1.7.1974.2. Onwards promotion from the post of Forest Range Officer is to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest. The claim of the petitioner was considered in 1978 and he was promoted as such on an adhoc basis by an order dated 23.8.1978. The desire of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for an order directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect from 1.7.1976 i.e. as per the date of his eligibility and also on account of the fact that a clear vacancy was available to promote the petitioner ...
Nand Kishor S/O Khayali Ram Vs. State of Uttarakhand
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This appeal, preferred by the appellant Under Section 374(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.9.1996 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital in Special Sessions Trial No. 260/1993, State v. Nand Kishor, whereby the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused/appellant Under Section 15/18 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) and sentenced him to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1.00 Lac. In default of payment of fine, two years' imprisonment was further awarded.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.3. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 20.9.1992 S.S.I. B.P.S. Rawat along with S.I. Chandra Pal Pathak and Constable Rukam Pal Singh were on patrolling duty at Rudrapur. When the aforesaid police party were going fro...
Pusi Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. The accused-appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 16.01.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 501 of 1995 whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.). The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 363 read with Section 366 of the I.P.C. and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 376 of the I.P.C. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The criminal law was set in motion on a complaint Ex. Ka-1 submitted by Ram Chandra Joshi, father of a minor girl (hereinafter referred to as victim) on 03.04.1995. [Name of the victim has not been mentioned to prevent social victimization or ostracism of the victim of the sexual offence for which Section 228-A of the I.P.C. has been enacted. I...
Trilok Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 03.11.1998 passed by the Sessions Judge, Almora in Sessions Trial No. 6 of 1997 whereby appellant-Trilok Singh has been convicted under Section 304 part II of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years.2. Brief facts of the case as per the prosecution are, that on 04.11.1996 at about 1:00 p.m. Trilok singh had altercation with his stepbrother Prem Singh and during the course of altercation Trilok Singh assaulted Prem Singh with a lathi on his head. On receipt of the lathi injury Prem Singh fell down and did not regain consciousness till 05.11.1996. Smt. Anuli Devi wife of Prem Singh (deceased) and others were in the process of shifting him to District Hospital but in the meantime Prem Singh expired on the next day i.e. 05.11.1996 at 6:00 p.m. Smt. Anuli Devi had informed about the incident to Nain Singh. After the death of her husband she asked Mohan Singh (PW-2) to repo...
State of Uttarakhand and ors. Vs. Kilkileshwar Mining Company and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
V.K. Bist, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23.10.2008 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 76 (M/S) 2008 'Kilkileshwar Mining Company and Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand and Ors.' whereby the writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed and the impugned orders passed by the appellants were quashed. By the said judgment, the mining lease of the respondents was restored for the remaining period. However, it was clarified that if the respondents violate the conditions of the mining agreement, which was granted in their favour, the same could be cancelled after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to them, as provided in the Uttaranchal Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules,2001.2. Brief facts, as emerge from the record, are that on 08-05-1987 a mining lease was executed between the Governor of Uttar Pradesh and one M/s Rajendra Rawat & Co., proprietor Ramesh Singh Rawat under the provisions of U.P Minor Mineral (Con...
State Vs. Manish Goyal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. The appeal filed by the State and revision filed by Vijendra Kumar Goyal, father of Preeti (deceased) shall be disposed of vide this common judgment as both arises out of the judgment dated 05.10.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Almora in sessions trial No. 1 of 2000 acquitting the accused-Manish Goyal, Jagdish Prasad, Smt. Sushma Goyal and Vikas Goyal for the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the I.P.C. For the sake of convenience the facts have been narrated from appeal No. 241 of 2006.2. The facts in brief are that Preeti Goyal, daughter of Vijendra Goyal was married with Manish Goyal on 28.01.1993 as per the Hindu rites and customs. Her parents had given sufficient dowry as per their capacity but her mother-in-law Smt. Sushma Goyal, father-in-law Jagdish Prasad Goyal, husband Manish Goyal and brother-in-law Vikas Goyal were not happy and have been harassing her for not bringing adequate dowry. She was being tortured and treated with cruelty in c...
Bijendra Kumar S/O Baleshwar and ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and Smt ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard.2. 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 complaint case No. 149 of 2005 (New No. 327 of 2005), Smt. Lata alias Sonali v. Bijendra Kumar and Ors., relating to offence punishable under Section 498A I.P.C. and one punishable under Section Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S. Kotwali Haridwar, District Haridwar, pending in the court of Ist Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that parties to the matrimony have already entered into compromise. Attention of this Court is drawn to annexure-S.A.1 to the supplementary affidavit, filed on behalf of the petitioner, which is copy of order dated 06.06.2007, passed by Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal No. 05 of 2006, Smt. Lata alias Sonali v. Bijendra Kumar, whereby said first appeal, has been de...
Gabbar Singh Rawat S/O Sri Shankar Singh Rawat, Vs. State of Uttaranch ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-01-2010
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 wa...
Ramesh Chandra Pant Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-01-2010
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...
Vishwanath S/O Haushila Prasad Vs. State of Uttarakhand
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-01-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This criminal appeal, preferred Under Section 374(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) is directed against the judgment and order dated 15/16.11.1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Uttarakhand matters, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 54 of 1999, State v. Ram Dhiraj and Anr., whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant Vishwanath and co-accused Ram Dhiraj under Section 307 read with Section 34 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as the IPC) and sentenced each of them to seven years R.I. with fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, two years further R.I. was awarded to each of them.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.3. In brief, the prosecution story is that on 25.2.1999 P.W.1 Smt. Kalawati lodged an oral report in the police station stating that she and her husband Ram Dhiraj (co-accuse...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »