Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Saghir Ahmad Vs. Rex

Saghir Ahmad vs Rex

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Sep 10, 1948
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/455331

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Saghir Ahmad

Advocate Mr. Kazmi

Respondent

Rex

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1949All190; 1949CriLJ243

Excerpt

- bind basni prasad, j.1. this is an application under b. 491, criminal p. c by a detenu, moulvi baghir ahmad, who has been detained under the orders of the provincial government, passed in accordance with the u. p. maintenance of public order (temporary) act, 1947. a preliminary objection has been raised by the learned assistant government advocate. he contends that inasmuch as the detenu is a resident of district kheri, this application should have been made to the bench of this court sitting at lucknow. the office has also made a note to this effect. mr. kazmi, learned counsel for the applicant, contends that this court can deal with this application.2. paragraph 14, u. p. high court's amalgamation order 1948 made by the governor-general in exercise of the powers conferred by section 229, government of india act, 1936, provides as follows:the new high court, and the judges and division courts thereof, shall sit at allahabad or at such other places in the united provinces as the chief justice may, with the approval of the governor of the united provinces, appoint:provided that unless the governor of the united provinces, with the concurrence of the chief justice, otherwise directs, such judges of the new high court, not leas than two in number, as the chief justice may, from time to time nominate, shall sit at lucknow in order to exercise in respect of cases arising in such areas in avadh as the chief justice may direct, the jurisdiction and power for the time being vested in the new high court.in pursuance of the aforesaid provision notification no. 610s dated 26th july 1948 was issued by the chief justice which runs as follows:in exercise of the powers conferred by article 14, u. p. high court (amalgamation) order, 1948, the chief justice of the high court of judicature bt allahabad is pleased to direct that as from 26th july 1948, until further orders the bench of the high court at lucknow shall exercise the jurisdiction and power vested under the said order in.....

Full Judgment

Bind Basni Prasad, J.

1. This is an application under B. 491, Criminal P. C by a detenu, Moulvi Baghir Ahmad, who has been detained under the orders of the Provincial Government, passed in accordance with the U. P. Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act, 1947. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned Assistant Government Advocate. He contends that inasmuch as the detenu is a resident of district Kheri, this application should have been made to the Bench of this Court Sitting at Lucknow. The office has also made a note to this effect. Mr. Kazmi, learned Counsel for the applicant, contends that this Court can deal with this application.

2. Paragraph 14, U. P. High Court's Amalgamation Order 1948 made by the Governor-General in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 229, Government of India Act, 1936, provides as follows:

The new High Court, and the Judges and division Courts thereof, shall sit at Allahabad or at such other places in the United Provinces as the Chief Justice may, with the approval of the Governor of the United Provinces, appoint:Provided that unless the Governor of the United Provinces, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice, otherwise directs, such Judges of the new High Court, not leas than two in number, as the Chief Justice may, from time to time nominate, shall sit at Lucknow in order to exercise in respect of cases arising in such areas in Avadh as the Chief Justice may direct, the jurisdiction and power for the time being vested in the new High Court.

In pursuance of the aforesaid provision Notification No. 610S dated 26th July 1948 was issued by the Chief Justice which runs as follows:

In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 14, U. P. High Court (Amalgamation) Order, 1948, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature Bt Allahabad is pleased to direct that as from 26th July 1948, until further orders the Bench of the High Court at Lucknow shall exercise the jurisdiction and power vested under the said Order in the said High Court in respect of the. cases arising in the whole of Avadh.

3. It is clear that so long as the aforesaid notification is in force it is the Bench of the High Court at Lucknow which alone can exercise the jurisdiction and power B of this Court in respect of cases arising in Avadh and an application of the present nature cannot be made at Allahabad. The detenu is not only a resident of Kheri but is also detained at Kheri. This application should, therefore, have been made at Lucknow. The application is not entertainable here. It will be returned to the learned Counsel for presentation to the Bench at Lucknow.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial