Allahabad Court March 1915 Judgments
In Re: a Mukhatar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All375(2); 30Ind.Cas.145
1. This matter is connected with a report against a certain Mukhtar, It is said that lie has changed sides in the course of different legal proceedings. In what is admitted to be the strongest case, against him the charge is as follows. Certain persons were accused of an assault upon the servant of a zemindar. The Mukhtar appeared on behalf of one or more of the accused persons in the Appellate Court. Later on the zemindars brought proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The property, the subject-matter of this application by the zemindars, is said to have been the sumo property a dispute about which led to the alleged assault. It is, therefore, said that the Mukhtar 'changed sides' and was thereby guilty of unprofessional conduct. It must be borne in mind in the first place that when the Mukhtar first appeared it was merely to argue an appeal upon the evidence that was on the record.2. The question in dispute in the proceedings under Section 145 would be as to...
Tag this Judgment!Risal Singh and anr. Vs. Balwant Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1915
Reported in: 30Ind.Cas.657
Henry Richards, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiffs claimed property known as the Landhaura Estate. One Raghubir Singh was the last owner. He died leaving a widow. Rani Dharam Kunwar, who gave birth to a posthumous son named Jagat Prakash Singh. This boy died shortly after his birth and the Rani purported to adopt a number of boys, one after the other, all of whom died in infancy. Finally she is alleged to have adopted the defendant, Balwant Singh. The Rani died on the 12th of November 1912 and the plaintiff No. 1 claims to be the reversioner and entitled to the estate on the death of the Rani. The second plaintiff is an assignee of a portion of the estate from plaintiff No. 1 and is probably th3 financier of the present litigation.2. The allegation of the plaintiffs is that Raghubir Singh never gave authority to his widow to adopt a son. The Court below has dismissed the plaintiffs' suit holding that a previous litigation between Rani Dharam Kunwar and Balw...
Tag this Judgment!Rana Dharam Singh and anr. Vs. Joti Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1915
Reported in: 28Ind.Cas.1005
Piggot, J.1. As long ago as the 27th of January 1914 a serious riot, accompanied with loss of life, took place at a certain village in the Saharanpur District. A number of persons were put on their trial and convicted of offences punishable under Sections 148 and 304/149, Indian Penal Code. They appealed to this Court and their appeals were disposed of by an order dated the 27th July 1914, by which the appeals of three of the appellants were allowed and those of the remaining appellants dismissed, subject to some modification of the sentences passed. In the course of the inquiry and trial ending with the Appellate judgment of this Court above referred to, a question arose as to whether there was not reason to suppose that the persons put on their trial in that case had been acting under the instigation of other and more influential persons, who, though not present at the riot themselves, had been guilty of abetment of the same within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code. An inquiry was...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Amba Prasad, Mukhtar of Moradabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All155(1); 28Ind.Cas.996
1. This matter is connected with a report against a certain Mukhtar, It is said that he has changed sides in the course of different legal proceedings. In what is admitted to be the strongest case against him the charge is as follows:Certain persons wore accused of an assault upon the servant of a Zemindar. The Mukhtar appeared on behalf of one or more of the accused persons in the Appellate Court. Later on the zemindars brought proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The property the subject-matter of this application by the zemindars, is said to have been the same property a dispute about which led to the alleged assault. It is, therefore, said that the Mukhtar 'changed sides' and was thereby guilty of unprofessional conduct. It must be borne in mind, in the first place, that when the Mukhtar first appeared it was merely to argue an appeal upon the evidence that was on the record. The question in dispute in the proceedings under Section 145 would be as to who...
Tag this Judgment!Dharam Singh and anr. Vs. Joti Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All186; (1915)ILR37All355
Piggott, J.1. As long ago as the 27th of January, 1914, a serious riot accompanied, with, Joss of life, took place at a certain village in the Saharanpur district. A number of persons wore put on their trial, and convicted of offences punishable under Sections 148 and HI of the Indian Penal Code. They appealed to this Court and their appeals were disposed of by an order, dated the 27th of July, 1914, by which the appeals of three of the appellants were allowed and those of the remaining appellants dismissed subject to some modification of the sentences passed. In the course of the enquiry and trial ending with the appellate Judgment of this Court above referred to, a question arose as to whether there was not reason to suppose that the persons put on their trial in that case had been acting under the instigation of other and more influential persons, who though not present at the riot themselves, had been guilty of abetment of the same within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code. An en...
Tag this Judgment!Parman Vs. Bohra Nek Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All380
1. The facts connected with this appeal are as follows : It is alleged that one Sanwalia died intestate. The property left by him is said to be only a house in a village. One Parman applied for letters of administration to the estate of the deceased and obtained an order on the 18th of September, 1914. The order was in the following terms:Read application from the abovenamed petitioner, dated the 18th of August, 1914, requesting that letters of administration to the estate of Sanwalia, deceased, may be granted to him under Act V of 1881. Valued at Rs. 400. Order - This case has been uncontested. I grant letters of administration to Parman applicant for the estate of his deceased nephew, Sanwalia; provided that if the valuation of the house made by the Collector exceeds the amount stated in the application the deficiency in foes shall be recovered.2. It appears that later on the same clay one Nek Ram came into court, with the result that the learned judge passed the following order:Afte...
Tag this Judgment!Parma Vs. Nek Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All172(2); 29Ind.Cas.133
Richards, C.J.1. The facts connected with this appeal are as follows. It is alleged that one Sanwalia died intestate. The property left by him is said to be only a house in a village. One Parma applied for Letters of Administration to the estate of deceased and obtained an order on 18th of September 1914. The order was in the following terms: Read application from the above-named petitioner, dated 18th August 1914, requesting that Letters of Administration to the estate of Sanwalia deceased, may be granted to him under Act V of 1881. Valued at Rs. 400. Order. This case has been uncontested. I grant Letters of Administration to Parma applicant for the estate of his deceased nephew Sanwalia; provided that if the valuation of the house made by the Collestor exceeds the amount stated in the application the deficiency in fees shall be recovered.' It appears that later on the same day one Nek Ram came into Court, with the result that the learned Judge passed the following order: After passin...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Mohan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.65
1. This case comes before us as a reference from the learned Sessions Judge of Bareilly. Four persons, Mohan Lal, Baldeo Prasad, Debi Sahai and Ram Ghulam, were all tried by a Magistrate on charges under Section 408 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and convicted. They all appealed to the Sessions Judge. He seems to have been of opinion that the case against Debi Sahai was not proved. He was also of opinion that the punishments awarded to the other three were insufficient. He has submitted the case to this Court with a recommendation that we should acquit Debi Sahai and enhance the sentences passed on the other three. So far as his recommendation that we should acquit Debi Sahai is concerned, it is quite clear that it was his dutj to either dismiss or allow the appeal of Debi Sahai. The learned Sessions Judge ought not to have referred the case of Debi Sahai to this Court at all. With regard to his recommendation for enhancement the learned Sessions Judge seems to have ev...
Tag this Judgment!Zorawar Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.77
Tudball, J.1. In so far as the the Magistrate's order refusing to accept the sureties is concerned, that order must be set aside. It is so obviously based upon the report of the Police, which is no evidence in the matter. In the evidence on the record there is no reason whatsoever to be discovered why the sureties should not be accepted. If any information was derived from the Police report, it was the duty of the Magistrate to have taken evidence as to what was the basis of that report and he should have come to a decision thereon himself. I, therefore, accept the reference. I set aside the order of the Magistrate and direct that the sureties offered be accepted, the necessary bond be taken and Zorawar released from prison. In regard to what the learned Sessions Judge has said in reference to alterations in the record of the case, I express no opinion, nor is it necessary for me to do so....
Tag this Judgment!Rasul Khan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All281; 29Ind.Cas.91
1. This is an appeal by nine persons against convictions under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentences of transportation for life. The main facts of the case are proved beyond all possible doubt. The cattle of the accused's party were trespassing and apparently doing considerable damage to the crop growing in a field belonging to the complainants. The complainants' party drove off the cattle and were bringing them to the pound. Some twelve or thirteen persons rushed down armed with lathis to rescue the cattle. Ranne Khan, appellant, at once gave the command to rescue the cattle and to use their lathis. The appellants' party at once proceeded to carry out the order. One of the complainants' party, a man named Lekha, ran away for about ten paces pursued by three men, all of whom art amongst the appellants, namely, Rasul Khan, Hakim Ali and Ashraf. They surrounded him cutting off his retreat. All the witnesses agree that Rasul struck him with a lathi on th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »