Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  


This Page To:

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL V/S RAMA, decided on Wednesday, July 31, 1963.
[ In the High Court of Rajasthan, Criminal Reference 179 of 1962 of. ] 31/07/1963
Judge(s) : D.M. BHANDARI & B.P. BERI
Advocate(s) : J.S. Gupta, Mangha Ram.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page

Judgments that may be related:-

  West Bengal M.R. Dealers? Association & Others V. State of West Bengal & Others,   26/10/2017.  

  Usha Agarwal Versus Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi & Others ,   29/08/2017.  

  Vidhya Vikas Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Education Department & Others,   03/08/2017.  

  The Commissioner of Income tax, Chennai Versus Late Dr. N. Rangabashyam, Rep. By wife & L/r Mrs. R. Chitralekha,   02/08/2017.  

  M/s. Sri Vishnu Srirama Constructions Rep. by its Managing Partner V. Rajagopal Reddy Versus The Andhra Pradesh Education & Welfare Infrastructure Development Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director & Others,   04/07/2017.  

  K. Ratna Prabha & Others Versus State of Telangana rep. by its Special Standing Counsel ACB & Others,   20/06/2017.  

  P.P. Sharma (Reference forwarded from 7th Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur) Versus ----------,   05/06/2017.  

  Ch. Laxminarayana Versus The State of Telangana rep. by its Special Public Prosecutor for CBI,   01/06/2017.  

  Rani Versus Prl., Secy., Higher Education Dept. & Others,   04/04/2017.  

  The Senior Vice-President M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited, Belgaum Works, Belgaum Versus K.V. Shetty ,   23/03/2017.  

  T. Ravi & Another Versus B. Chinna Narasimha & Others,   21/03/2017.  

  Chandra Singh Versus Shanta Devi & Others,   10/03/2017.  

  G. Rama Mohan Rao & Another Versus The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep, by its Principal Secretary and Chairman, Agricultural, Marketing & Cooperative Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Another,   07/03/2017.  

  Union of India Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Govt of India Enterprise Rep by its Chief Engineer (Electrical) Versus P. Shyamala & Another,   27/01/2017.  

  Sadhna Agrawal Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary & Others,   03/01/2017.  

  Medical Council of India & Another Versus Sikha Agarwal & Others,   07/12/2016.  

  Dr. Vathsalya K. Shetty Versus Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & Others,   25/10/2016.  

  Meenugu Mallaiah & Others Versus Ananthula Rajaiah & Another,   09/09/2016.  

  Ajija Banu Versus Vadivambal & Another,   02/08/2016.  

  Shah Alam Versus Union of India & Others,   29/07/2016.  

  Seema Rani & Another Versus State of Haryana & Others,   06/05/2016.  

  Gurala Babu Rao & Others Versus The Municipal Council, Parlakhemundi Municiplity & Others,   03/05/2016.  

  Abdul Sattar Haji Usman & Another Versus The Archbishop of Bombay & Others,   12/04/2016.  

  Mokidi Kishore & Others Versus The State of Telangana, rep.by its Prl.Secretary & Others,   07/04/2016.  

  M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited name changed as M/s. Sun pharmaceuticals Limited represented by Arun Sawhney (for short, ?Sun?) & Others Versus State of Telangana through P.S. Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, represented by its Public Prosecutor & Another,   01/04/2016.  

  Medidhi Chakra Veni Versus Kamisetti Venkata Ramanam & Others,   23/11/2015.  

  Jupudy Pardha Sarathy Versus Pentapati Rama Krishna & Others,   06/11/2015.  

  Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal & Others Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Others,   23/10/2015.  

  M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. & Another Versus Union of India, Ministry of Finance, rep. by its Secretary & Others,   07/10/2015.  

  Lanka Babu Surendra Mohana Benarji Versus Canara Bank, Unguturu & Another,   07/09/2015.  

  The State of Maharashtra & Others Versus Rajkumar & Others,   24/07/2015.  

  Bontha Veera Venkata Srihari Rao Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat & Others,   14/07/2015.  

  Inter Media Publishing Ltd., represented by its Managing Director, M. Usman Versus State of Kerala, represented by The Chief Secretary To The Government of Kerala & Others,   23/06/2015.  

  Manik Rama Toke & Another Versus The State of Maharashtra (through: Excise Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai) & Others,   22/06/2015.  

  M/s. Lakshminirman Bangalore Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director & Others Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax & Others,   12/06/2015.  

  The Chief Secretary, State Of Karnataka & Another Versus C.K. Rama Murthy & Others,   24/04/2015.  

  Inder Raj Agarwal Versus Union of India, rep., by Secretary, Department of Co-operative societies, Secretariat & Others,   24/04/2015.  

  CSEPDI - TRISHE Consortium, rep. By its Managing Director Sanjay K. Pillai Versus Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO) rep. By its Chairman & Managing Director & Others,   07/04/2015.  

  Sunitha Venkatram & Another Versus Divya Rayapati,   30/03/2015.  

  C.K. Rama Murthy & Others Versus State Election Commission, KSCMF Building, Annexe, represented by its Secretary, Bengaluru & Others,   30/03/2015.  

  Hariprasad Mohanlal Soni & Others Versus Malegaon Municipal Corporation,   24/02/2015.  

  M. Gnanam Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary & Others,   12/02/2015.  

  B. Chandrakala Versus A. Anuradha & Another,   31/12/2014.  

  High Court Of Karnataka, Represented By The Registrar General & Others Versus Syed Mohammed Ibrahim & Others,   17/12/2014.  

  Leelabai Sureshrao Bawane & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra,   12/12/2014.  

  State of Kerala, rep. by The Chief Secre Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala & Others Versus Hotel Leelaventure Ltd. rep. by its Executive Director, Venu Krishnan & Others,   08/12/2014.  

  Dalip Kumar Jha & Another Versus State of Punjab & Others,   01/12/2014.  

  D. Jagadesha & Others Versus A.L. Ramachandra & Others,   14/10/2014.  

  Dr. Shubash Singh Versus Maharashtra Medical Council,   07/10/2014.  

  Cheedella Padmavathi & Others Versus Cheedella Lakshminarasimha Rao (died) per LRs. & Others,   23/09/2014.  

#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw

  "1965 CrLJ 599"  ==   "1965 AIR (Raj) 107"  

    Code Of Criminal Procedure 1898 - Section 242 Section 243 -     (1.) THIS is a Reference by the Sessions Judge Ajmer recommending that the sentence of the accused Rama be enhanced to one week's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200 and in default of payment of fine to undergo 15 days' further rigorous imprisonment. (2.) THE accused was challaned for having sold adulterated milk to Kartar Singh food Inspector Municipal Area on 2nd of July 1961. A complaint was filed on the 3rd of October 1961 by the Medical Officer of Health Municipal Committee Ajmer summonses were issued against the accused for 21st of November 1961. Summonses were not served and the ease was adjourned to 5th of December 1961. Thereafter there is a note on the back of the complaint which is as follows:m. P. I. present Accused present Particulars of the offence read over and explained to the accused. He pleads not guilty and furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 500 each for regular Court attendance. But up on 8-1-1962. There is no date on this order. On 8-1-1962 the case was adjourned to 23-1-1962 without any further proceedings. On 23-1-1962 the case was again adjourned to 5-2-1962. On 5-2-1962 the following order was passed: 'parties present Particulars of the offence read over and explained to the accused Rama s/o Bhola. He pleads guilty and docs not wish to produce any defence. Hence the accused is convieted under Section 16 (a) P. F. A. '54 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5 (Rupees five only) or in default to undergo 2 days' S. I. Most of what has been written above is part of the rubber seal affixed on the back of the complaint. Of this order only the name of the accused the offence for which he was hied and the amount of the tine and the days of imprisonment are filled up by the Magistrate. (3.) THE complainant was dissatisfied on account of the inadequacy of the sentence and he filed a revision application before the Sessions Judge Ajmer and the learned Sessions Judge Ajmer has made the present reference for enhancement of the sentence. (4.) WE find that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code have not been followed in the trial of this case. The case was tried as a summons case under section 242 Cr. P. C. When the accused appeared the particulars of the offence of which he was accused should have been stated to him and he should have been asked to show cause why he should not be convicted. It was not necessary to frame a charge and unless there was a formal charge there was no question of pleading guilty. Under Section 243 Cr. P. C. it is incumbent on The Magistrate trying the case to record the state ment of the accused in case he admits that he has committed the offence of which he is accused as nearly as possible in the words used by him. As already pointed out there arises no question of pleading guilty. In the rubber seal which was put on the 5th of February 1962 the words used are--he pleads guilty which have no relevance when the trial is of a summons case. What is required is the recording of the admission of the accused in the words used by him. The learned Magistrate failed to do so and convicted the accused on the ground that he had pleaded guilty. The use of a seal of the nature used in this case is not warranted by the provisions of the law. The accused was being tried for an offence for which he could have been sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and it is incumbent on the Magistrate to see that in such a trial the provisions of the law are obeyed. We regret that on such a trial the conviction of the accused cannot be maintained. (5.) WE therefore set aside the order of the Municipal Magistrate First Class ajmer dated the 5th of February 1962 and also set aside the sentence of fine imposed on the accused. We send back the case to the Municipal Magistrate First class Ajmer for re-trial in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal procedure Code.