Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 2006 Page 7 of about 88 results (0.011 seconds)

Feb 01 2006 (HC)

Chandra Mohan @ Chanda Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-01-2006

Reported in : I(2006)DMC635; RLW2006(2)Raj1186; 2006(2)WLC466

khem chand sharma, j.1. this criminal appeal by appellant chandra mohan @ chandar sent through superintendent central jail, jaipur arises out of the judgment and order dated 31.10.2002 passed by the learned judge special court (fake currency cases), jaipur city, jaipur by which the learned judge has convicted the appellant for offence under section 302, ipc and sentenced him to life imprisonment with a fine of rs. 1,000. in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 months' rigorous imprisonment.2. on 20.9.2001, kumari reema (p.w. 1) who is none other than the daughter of appellant lodged a written report, ex. pi at police station ramganj, jaipur alleging therein that her father used to beat her mother mst. chhagani, since deceased. he had been quarelling with her mother continuously for last 3-4 days and had been threatening to kill her by cutting her neck. she alleged that her father was unemployed. whenever her mother used to ask him to earn livelihood, he beat her. on the day of incident at about 6.00 a.m. her mother had gone to attend the call of nature. she had left for fetching water and her father was sitting out side the gate of her house. at about 6.30 a.m. soon her mother reached near the house of suwalal, her father caught hold of her and cut her neck. when she came running, she found her mother lying on the ground and blood was oozing out from her neck and her father ran away with knife (chhuri) in his hand. hearing her hue and cry, the persons of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 2006 (HC)

Murlidhar Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-03-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(2)Raj1234; 2006(2)WLC138

s.k. sharma, j.1. instant appeal filed by the accused appellant murlidhar is against the judgment dated 3rd july, 2001 passed by addl. sessions judge, no. 2, (fast track), kota whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under section 302 ipc and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months ri.2. the brief facts which are relevant and essential for the disposal of this appeal are as under:3. pw 1 gajanand lodged a written report ex.p-1 before sho ps sangod district kota wherein he has written that in the last night he was sleeping at his home, in the night at about 2 pm murlidhar and daulatram came and murlidhar asked him to accompany with him to his home. murlidhar told him that he slept his wife santosh and after that she went to urination and she fell down and some stones fell upon her and she died. thereafter gajanand and daulatram and murlidhar went to the house of murlidhar where father of the accused, madan lal told him that the accused appellant has killed his wife. at that time sister-in-law of accused namely anokhbai was also present. she also said that accused has killed his wife santosh. on this report, police registered a case for the offence under section 302 ipc. statements of witnesses under section 161 cr.p.c. were recorded. site plant was also prepared. autopsy was done on the body of deceased santosh. blood stained trousers of accused was seized. one ' .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2006 (HC)

Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-23-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj1738; 2006(2)WLC699

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. applicant was the appellant in d.b. criminal appeal no. 569/2001 which was partly allowed on july 18, 2005 and the applicant was convicted and sentenced under section 304 part i ipc to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 8 years and fine of rs. 10,000/- in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. now the applicant has prayed to issue direction under section 428 cr.p.c. for setting off the period for which he was in detention during investigation and as under trial prisoner.2. it appears from the record that the applicant remained in police custody from march 19, 1999 till march 20, 1999 and in judicial custody from march 20, 1999 till the date of judgment of the trial court i.e. july 24, 2001, but since this period was not incorporated in the warrant of commitment, benefit of set off was not given to him.3. the reasons behind the enactment of section 428 cr.p.c. were the distressing facts noticed by the joint select committee about the accused persons who were kept in prison for very long period as under trial prisoners. the object of enacting section 428 was to relieve the anguish of prolonged detention of under-trial and to avoid over-crowding in jails. to dispense with slow-motion justice and long-distance investigation and trial proceedings the wholesome provision has been introduced. it simply aims at setting off or crediting the period of pre-convlction detention of the accused of a case towards the sentence .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 2006 (HC)

Suraj Mal @ Surjya Vs. State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-08-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj1806; 2006(2)WLC692

narendra kumar jain, j.1. this appeal, on behalf of the accused suraj mai @ surjya s/o shri phool chand, is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.7.2001 passed by the special judge, n.d.p.s. cases, jhalawar, in sessions case no. 29/2000, whereby he convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under sections 8/21 of the narcotics drugs & psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short, 'the act') and sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's additional rigorous imprisonment.2. briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that pw-8 pradeep kumar, s.h.o., police station, bhawanimandi, received a secret information on 11th august 2000 at about 11.00 p.m. on telephone from one informer that there is a house of surajmal meena at mandvi road, tagar mohallah, bhawanimandi and he has smack in his possession and he will go to kota in night by 'janta express' to dispose of the contraband. the said information was reduced by him in writing vide exhibit p-13 and the information was sent to superintendent of police, additional superintendent of police, jhalawar and circle officer, bhawanimandi, through wireless (exhibit p-14). thereafter he proceeded from the police station at 11.20 p.m. with yashwant singh, s.i., dadam chand, ghanshyam and ramesh chand, constable, with investigation kit. he reached at the residential house of surajmal as per information of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 2006 (HC)

Gopal Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-08-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2364; 2005WLC(Raj)UC227

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. gopal, the appellant herein was put to trial before the learned additional sessions judge sambhar lake district jaipur, who vide judgment dated march 6, 2003 convicted the appellant under section 302 ipc and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine rs. 2000, in default to further suffer one year simple imprisonment.2. the prosecution case as unfolded during trial is as under:-on october 6, 2000 the informant madan (pw. 8) submitted a written report (ex. p. 18) at police station phagi wherein he stated that his daughter was married to appellant who often used to beat her. on the day of incident when he reached to the house of appellant he found his daughter lying dead. there were injuries on her head, hands and legs. on that report a case was registered for the offence under section 302 ipc and investigation commenced. on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. in due course the case came up for trial before the learned additional sessions judge sambhar lake district.jaipur. charges under sections 302 and 201 read with 511 ipc were framed against the appellant, who denied the charge and claimed trial. the prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 15 witnesses. in the explanation under section 313 cr.p.c, the appellant claimed innocence. two witnesses in defence were examined. learned trial judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.3. we have heard the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 2006 (HC)

Dine Khan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-09-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj2596; 2006(4)WLC34

n.n. mathur, j.1. the appellants dine khan, panne khan, majid khan and ramjan khan all sons of sultan khan have been convicted on the charge of murder of mohd. yasin for offence under section 320/34 ipc and each of them have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 500/-, in default of payment of tine to further undergo one months simple imprisonment by the judgment dated 1.2.2002 passed by the learned additional sessions judge (fast track), nagaur.2. briefly stated the facts of the case are that p.w. 2 mohd. iqbal lodged a written first information report on 27.7.2000 at police station nagaur stating inter alia that in the night at about 11-11:30, a small boy visited his house and informed that his brother mohd. yasin was lying in the pool of blood near 'nakshbando-ki-maszid', on which, he along with his father, mother and brother rushed to the spot. they found mohd. yasin lying injured. on enquiry, he disclosed that appellants dine khan, panne khan, ramjan khan and majid khan called him from the house and brought to the place of incident. he also stated that appellant dine khan inflicted injury by knife on both the sides of his abdomen, on account of which, he fell down, thereafter, appellant panne khan inflicted injury by 'farsi' on the head. he was being dragged by appellants majid khan and ramjan khan. appellant dine khan inflicted injuries on various parts of his body. after considering him dead, the accused persons fled away. the injured mohd. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 2006 (HC)

Keshav Dass and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-15-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(1)Raj542

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. challenge in these two appeal is to the judgment dated november 30, 2000 rendered by learned additional sessions judge kishangarh (ajmer) whereby the four appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:raju ram @ raju:under section 120b ipc: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 302/34 ipc:to suffer imprisonment for life and tine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 364 ipc:to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 394 ipc:to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.ranjit, ramesh and keshav das:under section 120b ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 302/34 ipc:each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 364/34 ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.under section 394 ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2006 (HC)

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Jamal Deen and ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-17-2006

Reported in : 2007ACJ2732

manak mohta, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 12.12.1994 passed by the judge, motor accidents claims tribunal, nohar camp at bhadra in m.a.c.t. case no. 84 of 1992, whereby the learned tribunal has allowed the claim petition and has awarded a sum of rs. 78,000 plus interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition in favour of the claimants-respondents and against the non-claimants-appellants.2. brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 28.6.1992 a bus bearing no. rj 14-p 1062, which belonged to the r.s.r.t.c, sriganganagar depot was plying on bhadra-bikaner route. as per the facts stated in the claim petition, khanu sat on the top of the bus with prior permission of the driver. one rai singh, son of lalchand jat, resident of village kunji, tehsil bhadra and other persons were also sitting on the top of the bus. at kunji bus stand, they came into contact with live electric wires, as a result of which, khanu died and other persons received injuries due to touch of live electric wires. the said bus was being driven by bhagwant singh rashly and negligently without taking care of the electric wires. at the time of accident, the deceased khanu was 18 years old and he was earning rs. 100 per day by selling vegetables. due to untimely death of khanu, no male member was left in the family to look after his old parents. it was stated that his parents were dependent on the income of deceased .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2006 (HC)

Jagdish @ Patel Vs. State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-04-2006

Reported in : 2007(1)WLN224

ajay rastogi, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned public prosecutor for the state and perused the case diary made available for perusal at the time of arguments.2. counsel for accused-petitioners appearing in bail applications no. 6980/06, 6272/06 & 6118/06, submits that an fir was lodged of the present incident on 14th june, 2006 by matin miya, son of the deceased, who is also one of the eye-witnesses and apart from it, jagdish and sitaram who were also eye-witnesses and as alleged were injured. all the three have specifically named kailash, ramesh and khemraj who have caused blow upon the deceased and against present accused-petitioners there is a general allegation and apart from it, the incident as alleged took place in between 11-12 am and before the said incident, the police also lodged fir no. 138/06 on 14th june, 2006 itself wherein it has been alleged that the complainant along with other members have come forward to disturb the law and order situation and few of the police members were also injured by them.3. on a specific question put to the learned public prosecutor as to whether any specific allegation about the present incident with regard to deceased in any manner has connected to either of the accused-petitioners or not. he has read before me the statements of all the three eye-witnesses and nothing has come forward with regard to present accused-petitioners with any direct allegation of either of the parties.4. after .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2006 (HC)

Hariom Agarwal Vs. State and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-03-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2379; 2006(4)WLC286

harbans lal, j.1. this cr. misc. petition under section 482 cr.p.c. is.directed against the order dated 8.11.2005 whereby, learned chief judicial magistrate baran has taken cognizance of offences baran has taken cognizance of offences against chetan kumar, dharmendra kumar and praveen kumar only in cr. case no. 279/2005 and has refused to take cognizance against smt. veena jain, snnt, asha jain and vipul, non-petitioners no. 2 to 4.2. the relevant facts of the case are that a complaint came to be filed by the petitioner against non-petitioners no. 2 to 4 and chetan kumar, dharmendra kumar and praveen kumar for offences under sections 342, 353, 392, 324, 504 and 120-b i.p.c. in the court of chief judicial magistrate baran who forwarded it under section 156(3) cr.p.c. to police station kotwali baran for investigation. the police registered a case f.i.r. no. 59/2005 and after investigation submitted negative final report. the petitioner filed protest petition before the court whereupon, statement of the complainant and his witnesses were recorded under sections 200 and 202 cr.p.c. the learned court again sent the record to the s.h.o. kotwali baran for further investigation but without making further investigation again negative final report was submitted. the learned court below took cognizance of the offences under sections 342 and 323/34 i.p.c. vide order dated 8.11.2005 only against three accused persons namely; chetan kumar, dharmendra kumar and praveen kumar and declined to .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //