Allahabad Court September 1918 Judgments
Ram Prasad Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All68; 48Ind.Cas.499
Tudball, J.1. The facts out of which this revision on the criminal side has arisen are as follows : Pending in the Court of the Cantonment Magistrate of Meerut in his capacity as a Small Cause Court was an execution case. The decree-holder was directed to deposit the diet money of his judgment-debtor who was about to be arrested. He was ordered to do so within three days and the order was passed on the 9th of July 1918. The 10th, 11th and 12th of July were holidays, so that the only two days on which he could possibly deposit the money were the 9th and the 13th of the month. On the 15th of the month he made a complaint to the Cantonment Magistrate that although he had tendered the money to the Civil Ahmad Mul Chand, the latter had refused to take it and had ' made it impossible for him, the decree-holder, to comply with the order, On the 15th of July the Cantonment Magistrate made the following report to the Collector for orders: 'The Civil Ahlmad Mul Chand admits that the decree-holde...
Tag this Judgment!Gajadhar Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All67(1); 48Ind.Cas.493
Tudball, J.1. The facts of this case are as follows: Some thirty-eight years ago the applicant Gajadhar was convicted on a charge of theft under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5. In the current year he made a complaint against the opposite party Haribua Chamar. In cross-examination he was asked 'whether he had been convicted in Khaki Baba's theft case and sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment. His reply was no.' Haribua Chamar applied to the Magistrate for sanction to prosecute Gajadhar for perjury, in that he had falsely stated that he had not been sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment in Khaki Baba's theft case. That sanction has been granted and it was upheld on appeal by the District Magistrate. Gajadhar has come to this Court on revision. It has been shown by the production of a public register that Gajadhar was convicted in a theft case some thirty eight years ago and sentenced ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sahai and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All356; 50Ind.Cas.848
Tudball, J.1. The facts of this case are briefly as follows: A criminal complaint was preferred against certain persons in which the latter were charged with an offence under Section 453 of the Penal Code. The Court acquitted the accused, came to the conclusion that the charge was a false one and proceeded to take action under Section 476 of the Code, apparently with the approval of the Magistrate. Rup Ram, who was one of the accused, applied for sanction to prosecute the other side for offences under sections 211 and 193, on which the Magistrate dropped his proceedings under Section 476, because, as he says, under the circumstances it was useless to make Government responsible for conducting the case against these persons and incur heavy expenditure. In substitution of the proceedings which he had initiated, the Magistrate granted Rup Ram sanction to prosecute, thereby placing in his hands an effective weapon as against those who had charged him with the original offence. I have exami...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Hadiyar Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All197
Tudball, J.1. The appellant Hadiyar Khan has been convicted of the offence of perjury and has been sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment, including three months' solitary confinement, by the learned Sessions Judge of the Naini Tal district. The circumstances under which the appellant was tried and convicted are somewhat unusual. Two men, Aziz-ullah and Kifayat-ullah, were upon their trial in the Court of Session at Pilibhit on a charge of attempted murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Hadiyar Khan was called as a witness for the defence to prove that Aziz-ullah was actually dining with him at the time the offence is said to have bean committed. The trial of Azizullah and Kifayat-ul-lah concluded on the 2nd of August, 1918, at about 5 p.m. and the judge convicted them and sentenced them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307. On that very same date, namely the 2nd of August, 1918, the judge passed an order issuing notice to the defence witnesses to ...
Tag this Judgment!Hadiyar Khan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All1; 48Ind.Cas.673
Tudball, J.1. The appellant Hadiyar Khan has been convicted of the offence of perjury and has been sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment, including three months' solitary confinement, by the learned Sessions Judge of the Naini Tal District. The circumstances under which the appellant was tried and convicted are somewhat unusual. Two men Aziz-ullah and Kifayat-ul-lah were upon their trial in the Court of Session at Pilibhit on a charge of attempted murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Hadiyar Khan was called as a witness for the defence to prove that Aziz-ul-lah was actually dining with him at the time the offence is said to have been committed. The trial of Aziz-ul-lah and Kifayat-ul-lah concluded on the 2nd of August 1918 at about 5 p. m. and the Judge convicted them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307. On that very same date, namely, the 2nd of August 1918, the, Judge passed an order issuing notice to the defence witnesses to show cause why th...
Tag this Judgment!Ghulam Jilani and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All260; 51Ind.Cas.161
Tudball, J.1. This is an application in revision in respect to an order passed by the District Magistrate of Meerut on an appeal preferred from an order of a Magistrate of the First Class calling upon the applicants to provide security to be of good behaviour in a matter which arose under Section 109 of the Criminal Procedure Code. As the judgments of the Joint Magistrate and the District Magistrate show, the three present appellants were met at night time in the company of two other persons on the road at Meerut between Meerut City and the railway station. It appears that the Police had received certain information to the effect that men of bad character were about to commit a raid upon the town. They made preparations to counteract this and on the night in question they received information that the proposed raid had been postponed. The three present applicants were met by a party of Police that same night on the road as mentioned above. Apparently on the ground somewhere close to th...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Das and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All300(1); 51Ind.Cas.351
Tudball, J.1. The applicants have been convicted of criminal trespass under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code, and have been sentenced to fines of Rs. 10 and Rs. 20, respectively. The Magistrate has written a long and detailed judgment in which he has set out the facts very clearly. The school building, which is the subject-matter of the dispute, was dearly not the property of the complainant in the case. It was built by public subscription and he started a school in it with the assistance of certain persons whom he subsequently refused to allow to interfere with his management of the school. On another school being started his pupils all left him and he closed down. He went away and in his absence the applicants and certain others took possession of the main building on behalf of the other school, which is also a public institution, and started to hold certain classes in it. The complainant returned and put a lock upon the building which the opposite party at once removed. On these...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›