Uttaranchal Court June 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.
Charan Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
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 28.8.1997 passed by the Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 464 of 1995 State v. Charan Singh and Ors., whereby each of the accused appellants, viz., Charan Singh, Gurmeet Singh and Santo Kaur have been convicted under Section 304B, 498A and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC) and each of them has been sentenced to R.I. for 10 years Under Section 304B IPC, R.I. for 2 years Under Section 498A IPC and R.I. of 2 years Under Section 201 IPC. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 24.6.1995 at 6.15 pm, PW1 Pratap Singh lodged an oral report in PS Jaspur with the averments that two years ago, his daughter Smt. Chhilo Kaur was married to appellant accused Charan Singh resident of...
Almora Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Four ors. Vs. State of Uttarakh ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
B.S. Verma, J.(Stay Application No. 4458 of 2010)1. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief:i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notification dated 26-05-2010 issued by respondent No. 1 (Annexure-9).ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to declare the impugned notification dated 26-05-2010 ultra vires the powers of the State Govt. under Right to Information Act.iii) To issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.iv) Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.3. By the impugned Notification dated 26-5-2010, the Registrar, Cooperative Societies Uttarakhand has been notified Public Authority unit for the Urban Cooperative Banks Ltd. by making amendment in the earlier notification dated 5t...
Prem Batta S/O Late Shri Amar Chand Batta and Vs. State of Uttarakhand ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
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 case No. 5818 of 2010 (old No. Misc. M 239 of 2009, 2598 of 2008 & 32 of 2007) State v. Prem Chand and Ors. relating to offences punishable under Section 384, 504, 506 I.P.C, and one punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, III, Dehradun.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that on 15.05.2003, Ram Murti Batta (brother of the applicant No. 1) lodged a first information report, relating to offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C., with police outpost Patel Nagar, Police Station Kotwali, Dehradun, against unknown persons after his brother was fired at and wounded. It appears that after investigating, a charge sheet was filed against five pe...
Kirat Pal Singh S/O Asha Ram, Vs. the State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
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 5.10.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee in Sessions Trial No. 79/1993 State v. Kiratpal Singh and Ors. thereby convicting and sentencing the appellant/accused Kirat Pal Singh Under Section 325 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) and sentencing him to three years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default, three months' further RI was awarded, and further convicting and sentencing him Under Section 323/34 IPC for six months' RI. Appellants-accused Anil Kumar and Tej Pal were convicted and sentenced Under Section 325/34 IPC for three years' RI each with fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default, three months' RI each and both of them were further convicted and sentenced Under Section 323 IPC for six months' RI. All the sente...
The State Vs. Vijay Pal Singh S/O Pooran Singh,
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This appeal, preferred by the State/appellant under Section 378 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.7.1995 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, Camp Haldwani in Sessions Trial No. 281 of 1991 State v. Vijay Pal and Ors. Where by the learned Third Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents of all the charges levelled against them.2. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.3. In brief, the prosecution story is that on 25.5.1991 Ramesh Singh lodged a report in the Police Station Jaspur with the averments that his daughter was married to the respondent/accused Narendra Singh S/o Vijay Pal Singh on 10.2.1991. He came to know from respondent/accused Vijay Pal Singh that in the night of 23.5.1991 his daughter has gone somewhere without informing anyone. He tried to make search of his daughter but her whereabouts could no...
Commissioner, Trade Tax/Commercial Tax Vs. Satyam Traders
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. M/s Satyam Traders, Talla Mota Dhak is undisputedly a registered dealer at Najibabad. Najibabad is in the State of Uttar Pradesh. M/s Satyam Traders undisputedly deals in the sale and purchase of iron scrap and ingot. In so far as the present controversy is concerned, M/s Satyam Traders purchased 18.640 metric tons of cast iron dust from M/s Sagar Enterprises, Najibabad. The instant purchase was made by M/s Satyam Traders from within the State of Uttar Pradesh. The purchase made by the respondent from M/s Sagar Enterprises, is not subject matter of the present controversy.2. M/s Satyam Traders, Talla Mota Dhak, whilst transporting the aforestated cast iron dust, was found to be travelling over the territory of Uttarakhand. This came to be determined when the police authorities of the State of Uttarakhand challaned truck, bearing Registration No. HR-38E-4721, at Jashodharpur. The aforesaid truck was carrying cast iron dust purchased by the respondent from M/s Sagar E...
State of Uttarakhand and anr. Vs. Mohan Chandra Upreti
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.CLMA No. 1105 of 2008WithCLMA No. 4320 of 20101. Through Delay Condonation Application No. 1105 of 2008, the applicants/appellants have sought condonation of delay of 707 days in filing the main appeal. The primary basis of the delay, in filing the Special Appeal, has been depicted in paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed by Sri Vivek Pandey, Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Nainital. Paragraph 3 of the aforesaid affidavit is being extracted hereunder:3. That the second appellant remained under a bonafide impression that by the steps taken by him the Hon'ble Court's judgment dated 3.3.2006 was complied with. However, on 12.12.2007 when the deponent contacted the State Counsel in connection with filing of counter affidavits to three writ petitions bearing numbers 355 (S/S) of 2006, 554 (S/S) of 2007 and 1617 (S/S) of 2007 whereby the concerned writ petitioners had prayed for a relief in terms of the impugned judgment dated 3.3.2006, the State Counsel after going ...
S. Vishwanathan S/O Shankaran Vs. Smt. Pushpa and State of Uttarakhand
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 06.05.2010, passed by Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2010, whereby said court has dismissed the appeal and declined to interfere order dated 27.01.2009, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal in Misc. Case No. 06 of 2010 filed under Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005.3. Learned Counsel for the revisionist submitted before this Court that the order passed by the Magistrate on 27.01.2009, is an ex-parte order. It is pointed out that there was no service of notice on the revisionist before the impugned order was passed by the Magistrate. It is pleaded that learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal (appellate court) has erred in law in dismissing the appeal.4. Perusal of the order dated 27.01.2009, passed by the Magistrate itself shows that the respondent could not be served with the notice. Not only this, it is also mentioned that the respondent could no...
Commissioner, Commercial Tax Vs. Sagar Enterprises
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. On the proposition of law arising in the instant Trade Tax Revision, the matter has already adjudicated in a connected case (Trade Tax Revision No. 03 of 2009). All the legal issues canvassed herein are exactly the same as were canvassed in Trade Tax Revision No. 03 of 2009, except for one pointed distinction drawn by the Learned Counsel for the respondent.2. The distinction drawn by the Learned Counsel for the respondent is, that the respondent herein i.e. M/S Sagar Enterprises, Najibabad, District Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh had sold the goods, which were being transported (and which were allegedly impounded at Jasodharpur) to M/s Satyam Traders, Talla Mota Dhak, District Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh from its premises at Najibabad, and as such, no liability could be fastened upon the respondent for violation of Section 28-A(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the respondent, that the instant factual aspect has been taken into con...
Baldeo Singh Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-10-2010
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This appeal, Under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.12.1996, passed by Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi, in S.T. No. 8 of 1994 State v. Baldeo Singh, convicting accused Baldeo Singh Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that one Narain Puri lodged a first information report on 26.12.1993, at P.S. Kotwali Uttarkashi mentioning therein that on 26.12.1993 at about 9.45 P.M. Bhanu Pratap Singh came to his house and informed him that his daughter Savitri wife of Baldeo Singh has been burnt and the villagers have taken her to District Hospital, Uttarkashi. On this information, he reached District Hospital, Uttarkashi, and saw that whole body of his daughter was burnt and she was crying. She told him that her husband came in drunken condition to his house and when she expressed her opinion as to why he was wasting his money, her husband started beating ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »