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.
Manjeet Gupta W/O Deepak Gupta, Vs. State of Uttarakhand Through Secre ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for respondent No. 1/State.2. Petitioner No. 1 Manjeet Gupta is present in person before this Court, and she was heard in person.3. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 847 of 2009; State v. Deepak Gupta and Ors., relating to offences punishable under Section 366, 376, 417, 342, 120-B of I.P.C., pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners pleaded that the petitioner No. 1 (daughter of respondent No. 2 Iqbal Singh Bhullar/complainant) was in love with petitioner No. 2 Deepak Gupta. It is further pleaded that the two got married with each other on 27th of July 2008. Copy of certificate of marriage is filed as Annexure-3 to the petition. It is further pleaded that pet...
Daya Ram Sharma S/O Shri Het Ram Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Smt. Jai ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision is directed against judgment and order dated 14.09.2000, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Sessions trial No. 184 of 1999, whereby said court has acquitted the accused (respondent No. 2) Jai Rani from the charge of offence punishable under section 304 of I.P.C.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. Prosecution story in brief is that complainant's son Satish Chandra Sharma (deceased) got married to the accused Jai Rani (respondent No. 2) on 27.04.1995. The complainant has alleged that Jai Rani was not happy with her marriage as she used to press for divorce. On 17.06.1997, at about 08:00 P.M in the I.T.I Colony, within the limit of Police Station, Tanakpur, when she alongwith her husband (Satish Chandra Sharma) was on the roof of their house with two nephews namely Banty aged 12 years (P.W.-4) and Kukoo aged 6 years (P.W.-5) who were also there, Jai Rani insisted Satish to close his eye...
Neeraj Kumar Tyagi S/O Late Jai Prakash Tyagi Vs. Allied Glasses Throu ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard.2. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has sought quashing of Criminal Complaint Case No. 528 of 2009; Allied Glasses v. Competent Glasses, relating to offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, pending in the court of First Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the court at Roorkee has no territorial jurisdiction in the matter.4. However, perusal of the criminal complaint copy of which is annexed as Annexure-1 to the petition discloses that part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial limits of Roorkee court. The relevant paragraph is being reproduced below:;g fd foi{kh la0 2 ds uke ls ifjoknh dh QeZ ls m/kkj eky ysrk Fkk mlus le; le; ij tks eky ifjoknh dh QeZ ls m/kkj fy;k mldh ,ot esa pSd la0 614807 eqcfyx ,d yk[k :Ik;s fnuka...
Management Committee of Waqf No. 130 and ors. Vs. State of Uttarakhand ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. Learned Counsel for the parties are agreed, that the instant special appeal be disposed of by requiring the learned Single Judge to take a final decision in the matter on the next date of hearing, or as soon thereafter, as may be possible and expedient in the facts and circumstances of this case.2. In view of the above, the instant special appeal is disposed of in terms of the joint prayer made by the learned Counsel for the rival parties....
Sanjeeta Sharma W/O Shri Subodh Sharma D/O Shri Chand Prakash Vs. Subo ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Both these revisions are directed against the order dated 20.10.2009, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, in case No. 181 of 2005, whereby said court has directed the husband (Subodh Sharma) to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3,500/- (three thousand five hundred) per month to the wife (Sanjeeta Sharma) under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. from the date of order.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The parties to the matrimony are also present in person.3. Brief facts of the case are that Sanjeeta Sharma got married to Subodh Sharma on 29.04.2004, at Dehradun. However, after the marriage, their relations soured. Sanjeeta Sharma (wife) filed a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for decree of divorce which was decreed on 24.07.2009. Meanwhile, it appears that she had filed criminal misc. case No. 181 of 2005, for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The trial court (after decree of divorce had been passed) called the parties, made reconc...
Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Dr. M.C. Bhandari Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. The petitioner retired from the Indian Army on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.08.2006. At the time of his retirement, the petitioner was holding the rank of Lieutenant General.2. After his retirement, the State of Uttarakhand appointed the petitioner as Chairman of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission vide an order dated 3.11.2006. In furtherance of the aforesaid appointment, the petitioner assumed his duties as such on 24.11.2006.3. The Governor of the State of Uttarakhand is competent to frame regulations to determine the condition of service of the Chairman, as also, Members of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. This power flows to the Governor under Article 318 of the Constitution of India. Article 318 of the Constitution of India is being extracted hereunder:'318 Power to make regulations as to conditions of service of members and staff of the Commission - In the case of the Union Commission or a Joint commission, the President and, in t...
Dr. Bhopal Singh S/O Shri Ram Swaroop Singh, Vs. State of Uttaranchal ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
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. 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 satis...
Kumari Usha Saxena D/O Late Sri Gopal Kumar Saxena Vs. Divisional Fore ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Shri Siddhartha Bisht, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Subhash Upadhyaya, the learned Brief Holder for the respondents.2. The petitioner's father was working as a Class-IV employee in the Forest Department and, after putting in 30 years of service, died in harness on 1st June, 2005. The deceased left behind his wife and two unmarried daughters including the petitioner. The financial conditions of the deceased family was in a penurious state of affairs and, accordingly, the petitioner moved an application on 18th June, 2005 before the authority for appointment on compassionate grounds. This application remained pending and, considering the urgency of the matter, the petitioner approached the writ court by filing a writ petition in October, 2005 which was entertained and the respondents were directed to file a counter affidavit. The petitioner prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner according to her qua...
U.P. Cooperative Sugar Factories and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Shri Tanveer Alam Khan, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Dinesh Gahatori, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3.2. The petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the award passed by the Labour Court directing reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and with full backwages.3. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the workman was appointed on a temporary basis by an order dated 20th March, 1982. It is alleged that the workman after joining on 31st March, 1982 worked for only two days and then remained absent, as a result of which, the services of the workman was terminated. The workman represented and the management, taking a humanitarian approach, allowed the workman to join. It is alleged that the workman worked intermittently and, most of time, the workman remained absent without applying for leave. It is alleged that the petitioners' issued several notices and warning letters and tha...
Devendra Singh Rana S/O Late Inder Singh Rana Vs. Commissioner, Garhwa ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
B.S. Verma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:i. An order or direction to set aside the judgment/order dated 28-3-2001 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate and the order dated 30-4-2002 passed by Tehsildar/Auction Officer informing cancellation of sale (Annexure No. 2) and the impugned order dated 29-6-2002 passed by the Commissioner i.e. respondent No. 1 (Annexure No. 6) whereby petitioner's objections were cancelled.ii. An order or direction to direct the respondents to confirm the auction sale dated 11-1-2001 and to handover possession of the property in question to the petitioner.iii. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.iv. To award the cost to the petitioner.3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner is an auction purchaser and the public auction of the pro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »