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.
Sewa Ram and ors. Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This appeal, preferred by the appellants under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.11.1997 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No. 71 of 1994, State of U.P. v. Sewa Ram and Ors., whereby accused appellants Sewa Ram and Ranvir have been convicted under Section 323/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC) and Anr. accused appellant Pala has been convicted under Section 324/34 IPC. Accused appellant Sewa Ram has also been convicted under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short, the Act). For the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Act, accused appellant Sewa Ram has been sentenced to undergo one years' RI along with a fine of Rs. 1000/- in each of the abovesaid offences and in default of payment, he was directed to undergo additional RI of six months each in the...
Surendra Kumar Arora Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. The appellant was promoted as a Branch Manager in an officiating capacity vide an order dated 08.08.1989. Soon thereafter he was reverted from the post of Branch Manager to the post of Assistant Accountant vide an order dated 01.09.1992. To assail the order of his reversion dated 01.09.1992, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 34721 of 1992 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. An interim order dated 18.09.1992 was passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 34721 of 1992, whereby the order of reversion dated 01.09.1992 was stayed.2. On the creation of successor State of Uttarakhand with effect from 09.11.2000, Writ Petition No. 34721 of 1992 was transferred to the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital. Before the High Court of Uttarakhand, the aforesaid writ petition was re-numbered as Writ Petition (M/B) No. 1169 of 2001. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, the same was dismissed on account of non-prosecution by an order dated 24.02...
Bhairav Dutt Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2010
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This appeal, under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arise out against the judgment and order dated 5-6-2007, passed by Sessions Judge, Bageshwar, in S.T. No. 02 of 2006, convictring the accused/appellant Bhairav Dutt, Under Section s 307 and 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo seven years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- Under Section 307 I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for three months and to undergo life imprisonment Under Section 302 I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for six months. However, all the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 15.10.2005, at about 7.00 P.M. Amba Dutt Joshi, complainant, lodged a written report at Patwari Circle Gagarigoal, Tehsil Garur, District Bageshwar, with the allegations that on 12.10.2005 at his house in village Nargwadi, where his son Harish Chandra lives with his family, ...
Maj. (Retd.) J.S. Sandhu S/O Late Shri Surat Singh Sandhu Vs. State of ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2010
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 petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case No. 553 of 2005, Hari Chand Aggarwal v. J.S. Sandhu relating the offences punishable under Section 500,504 of I.P.C. pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit on record.3. Brief facts of the case are that there is a society known as 'Mont Clair Makaan Malik Welfare Society' Mussoorie, which is registered under The Societies Registration Act, 1860. Respondent No. 2/complainant is the President of said society. Petitioner Maj. (Retd.) J.S. Sandhu, was the member of said society. It appears that the petitioner made several complaints to the various administrative authorities relating to working of the society, making allegations against its office bearers. It is pleaded in the present pe...
Ram Manohar, Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2010
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. Since all the above four appeals arise out of the same judgment and order and similar question of fact of law is involved, they are being decided by this common judgment.2. All the appeals arise out against the common judgment and order 13.5.2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C.VI Dehradun, in Sessions Trial No. 33 of 2003 State v. Ramesh and Ors. whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted accused/appellants Ramesh, Ram Manohar and Jai Chandra under Sections 396, 412, 201 I.P.C. The Sessions Judge while convicting the said accused/appellants under Section 396 I.P.C. sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine they were directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The Sessions Judge while convicting the said accused/appellants under Section 412 I.P.C. sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of payment of...
Mamchand, Vs. the State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2010
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 18.4.1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee in Sessions Trial No. 174 of 1993, State v. Mam Chand and Ors., whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted each of the appellants/accused Under Section 307/34 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) and sentenced each of them to five years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- each and in case of default, six months' further R.I. was awarded.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.3. In brief, the prosecution case is that complainant (P.W.1) Amar Singh lodged an FIR stating therein that on 4.3.1992 at about 4 PM, his son Babu Ram was coming at his house along with his earned money of Rs. 4,000/- towards wages. As soon...
Om Prakash Saini S/O Shri Mukund Ram Saini Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2010
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 ...
S.S. Marketing and Khanna Market Through Proprietor Mannu Tandon S/O S ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2010
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 petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 05.10.2009 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital, in criminal case No. 1424 of 2005, State v. Mahesh Rawat and Ors., relating to offence punishable under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital.2. Heard.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that respondent No. 2, Mahesh Rawat is the person from whom sample of 'Paras Sabji Masala' was purchased by the Food Inspector, in which in the contents 3.8% salt, found in the sample, was not disclosed in the packet. It is further pleaded that manufacturer and distributor are already impleaded as parties. Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner, who is supplier is being summoned, now, in the criminal case vide impugned order passed by the Trial Court...
Vijay @ Bhoora Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-09-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This appeal, preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the consolidated judgment and order dated 12.6.1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (EC Act), Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 2/1995 and 3/1995 State v. Vijay @ Bhoora, whereby the appellant/accused Vijay @ Bhoora has been convicted under Sections 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC) and Section 25/4 of the Arms Act (for short, the Act) and he was sentenced to undergo five years' R.I. under Section 376 IPC and one year's R.I. under Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Act. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. In brief, the prosecution case is that PW3 Naresh Kumar lodged an FIR Ex. Ka-1 on 24.10.1994 at 8.10 pm with PS Bindal, Dehradun with the averments that his mother-in-law Roshni Devi (PW2) was the resident of Indira Colony, Chakkuwala. She had gone on to d...
Smt. Manjeet Arora (Kataria) Vs. the Presiding Officer, Central Govt. ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-09-2010
ORDERConsequent upon the extension of the DST sponsored research project entitled operationalisation of the Geographical Informations system for Micro Level Planning Pauri Garhwal U.P. vice DST letter No. ES/11/209/95 dated 16th May, 1996 the tenure of temporary appointment of Miss Manjeet Kaur Research Assistant is extended upto 14.5.97 on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the memorandum No. 1 03/1/95/DST/Estt (4)/95 dated 17.1.96.Sd/-Registrar5. The petitioner's services automatically came to an end upon the expiry of the period and the respondent did not extend her services after 14th May, 1997. The matter ended at that stage. It is alleged that on 4th January, 2001, the respondents issued an order regularizing the services of three employees, who were involved in the project and, based on this order, the petitioner raised an objection alleging discrimination, which ultimately led to the adjudication of the following dispute. The terms of the reference order is;whether the em...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »