Uttaranchal Court August 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.
Lal Singh S/O Bankey Lal SimariyA. Vs. State of Uttaranchal.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
1) This appeal, preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.08.1997, passed by III Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 310 of 1994, whereby said court has convicted accused / appellant Lal Singh under Section 363, 366 and 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.). He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 363 of I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for the period of five years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 366 of I.P.C., and rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 376 of I.P.C.2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3) Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 24.03.1994, at about 04:00 A.M., accused / appellant Lal Singh enticed away P.W. 2 Maya, aged 16 years, from her village Ram...
Sanjeev Kumar SaksenA. Vs. State of Uttaranchal.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
1. This is a revision filed by accused Sanjeev Kumar Saksena and Akeel Khan against the judgment dated 10.07.2002 passed by District Judge, Nainital, who has maintained the judgment and order dated 30.04.2002 passed by CJM, Nainital only to the extent of conviction and sentence of the revisionists under section 411 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC").2. The prosecution case is that Jaikrishna Murti Prasad (PW1) lodged a report on 05.11.1993 with police station Mallital, District Nainital that his Maruti Van bearing registration no. UP 07 A 0606 has been stolen during the night intervening 4th and 5th November, 1993 from Pitaria near Polytechnic College, Nainital. He disclosed the identity of Maruti Van in his complaint (exhibit Ka 2) as under:Chassis No. 757507Engine No. 252358Model No. 1987 andColour of Maruti Van vehicle as white. The matter was investigated and the final report was submitted by the Investigating Officer on 08.05.1994 as untraceable. However, ...
Smt. Gurmeet Kaur. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
1. Heard Smt. Prabha Naithani, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. None appeared for the respondent no. 2 despite being served personally.2. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 11.8.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Revision No. 30/2006 Nek Chand v. Smt. Gurmeet Kaur & Ors., whereby the order dated 1.3.2006 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/J.M., Ist Class, Kashipur framing the charge against the respondent no. 2 for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC has been quashed.3. Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 married to each other about 20 years ago as per Hindu rites and the parents of the petitioner had given several articles to the respondent no. 2 as stridhan to their daughter. After sometime, respondent no. 2 and...
Chandra Bhan (Since Deceased) S/O Balak Ram, and ors. Vs. the State of ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
1) This appeal, preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 02.02.1995, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Roorkee, in Sessions Trial No. 106 of 1993, whereby said court has convicted accused / appellants Raj Kumar and Balak Ram under Section 368 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.), and sentenced each one of the two to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years, and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. Appeal of accused / appellant Chandra Bhan, due to his death during the pendency of this appeal, stands abated.2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3) Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 24.02.1992, at about 09:15 P.M., P.W. 2 Raj Kumar (complainant) lodged first information report at police station Laksar, stating that his sister Uma (P.W. 1) was missing from her house. She was aged 16 years. It is also mentioned in th...
Hari Singh S/O Sri Chander Singh. Vs. Guman Singh, and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1) By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 15.09.2003, passed by the Consolidation Officer; order dated 28.12.2004, passed by the Asstt. Settlement Officer of Consolidation; and order dated 19.04.2007, passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Haridwar (Camp Roorkee).2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit filed on behalf of the parties.3) Brief facts of the case are that the dispute between the parties relates to Khasra No. 35, measuring area 0.041 Hectares, and Khasra No. 36, measuring area 0.041 Hectares, situated in Village Ganeshpur, Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar. The petitioner's case is that he purchased 4 Biswa land of plot No. 35, and 4 Biswa land of plot No. 36 from the predecessors-in- title, namely Tikka S/o Daulat and Bhagwati W/o Mohkam, through registered sale deed executed in the year 1978. It is...
State of Uttaranchal. Vs. Babu @ Irfan Ali, S/O Nazroo, and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1. This appeal, preferred under section 378 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C)is directed against judgment and order dated 06.12.1996, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, E.C. Act, Dehradun, in Sessions Trial No. 138 of 1995, whereby said court has acquitted the respondents Gulfam (since deceased), Abbas Ali, and Babu @ Irfan Ali from the charge of offences punishable under section 307, 324, 506 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC).2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 20.04.1994, women from families of P.W.1 Liyakat Ali (complainant) and accused Mushtaq Ahmad (since deceased), in village Jhabrawala, quarreled over some issue on which P.W1 Liyakat Ali went to police station and got lodged report of said incident. When he came back to the village accused Mushtaq Ahmad (since deceased), Gulfam (since deceased), Babu @ Irfan Ali, and Abbas armed with knives came to the ...
Rameshwar and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1. These revisions, preferred by the revisionists under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), are directed against the judgments and orders dated 20.8.2002 passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 41/2001,Rameshwar v. State of Uttaranchal and in Criminal Appeal No. 54/2001, Amar Singh @ Jhandu v. State of Uttaranchal, whereby the appeal preferred against the judgment and order dated 10.7.2001 passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar was partly allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded to the revisionists under Section 380 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC) was set aside. However, the conviction of each of the revisionists under Section 411 IPC has been upheld and sentence awarded to each of the revisionists to undergo R.I. for six months was also affirmed.2. Since both these revisions involve common facts and arise out of the same offence, hence they are bein...
Ali Hasan and Others. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and Another.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1. This criminal application, preferred u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed for quashing the summoning order dated 24.5.2006 as well as the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.267 of 2006, Smt. Beena v. Ali Hasan & others, U/s 452/323/504/506 IPC, pending before CJM Uttarakashi.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.3. In brief, the case of the complainant/respondent no.2 is that she resides along with her mother at her parental house and the petitioners also reside adjacent to her house. On 19.4.2006 when the complainant's mother had gone in the market, at about 5 PM, the petitioners threw dirty water and garbage in front of her house. When she refused the petitioners to it, the petitioners entered inside her house where they jostled with her and the petitioner Smt. Munni also threw slipper on the complainant's head and also threatened to her life. The complainant tried to lodge th...
Chait Ram and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2010
1. This revision, preferred by the revisionists under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) has been filed for quashing the judgment and order dated 19.7.2002 pased by the Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag in Criminal Appeal No. 4/2002, Chait Ram & Anr. v. State of Uttaranchal as well as for quashing the judgment and order dated 27.5.2002 passed by the SDM, Ukhimath, Rudraprayag in Case No. 7/2002, State v. Chait Ram & Anr. directing the revisionists to execute a bond for Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties in the like amount for keeping peace for a period of one year.2. In brief, the prosecution case is that Supervisor Kanoongo, Guptkashi submitted a chalani report dated 8.7.2001 before the SDM, Ukhimath in which he has stated that the complainant Nand Kishor, etc. and revisionists are the residents of the nearby villages and a public way runs form the village Sankri of the complainant to Guptkashi through Chauri Tok and the revisionists...
State of Uttaranchal. Vs. Paras and Another.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2010
1. This appeal, preferred by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.2.1997 passed by the Special Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 208 of 1992, State v. Paras & Another, whereby the accused respondents Paras and Prem Singh have been acquitted for the charge of offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC).2. In brief, the prosecution case is that PW1 Hansraj Singh lodged an FIR with PS Kichha on 2.7.1992 at 1.30 pm with the averments that on 2.7.1992 at about 5.30 am his son Nikhil Kumar (PW2) and Munna Singh (PW6) were collecting mangoes fallen from the mango trees in the back of his house. Meanwhile, respondents Paras and Prem Singh came there armed with knives and chased his sons by threatening that they would kill them. His sons ran towards the house. Hearing the noise of his sons, the complainant and the neighbourers Babulal ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »