Allahabad Court November 1925 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ram Rup Agrahri and ors. Vs. Naik Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All252
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal from an order dismissing an appeal as being barred by time.2. The claim was decreed by the first Court on 17th of December 1924, and the defendants applied for the copies of the decree and judgment on the 23rd of December. These copies were ready on the 5th January. An, appeal was preferred by the defendants on the 17th of January 1925, through a vakil whose vakalatnama was filed along with the memorandum of appeal. Later on it was discovered that the names of the appellants and the name of the vakil were omitted from the body of the vakalatnama which was, however, signed by the appellants and the vakil. On the 12th of February 1925, one of the appellants who was present filed a fresh vakalatnama duly signed by him with an application praying that the omission might be deemed to have been cured. The learned Judge, however, held against the defendants and dismissed the appeal on the ground that it had not bean properly presented.3. On the 18th...
Qazi FariduddIn Vs. Emperor and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All295; 94Ind.Cas.894
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision from an order directing the complainant to pay compensation of Rs. 100 each to three accused and Rs. 20 to the fourth accused.2. The applicant filed a complaint under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of a first Class Magistrate. The Magistrate did not treat this application as a mere information under Section 190(c) and did not proceed as required by Section 191. He treated it as a complaint and sent this complaint to the police for enquiry under Section 202. 'When the police investigated the case, they came to the conclusion that the case was true, but they did not merely send up a report in favour of the complainant, but dealt with the case under Sections 454 and 411 and added one more accused, Mahomedan Idris, in the list. The prosecution evidence was tendered and several witnesses were examined. It appears that the Magistrate allowed the present applicant to engage a vakil to look after the case and he also made him...
Banwari Lal Vs. Jhunka
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All229; 92Ind.Cas.454
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision from an order passed on appeal directing the prosecution of the applicant under Sections 193 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant filed a suit on the basis of a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the defendant and also produced a receipt purporting to be of the same date. The defendant denied the genuineness of these documents and denied that he had ever borrowed any money from the plaintiff. The promissory note and receipt were sent to the thumb-impression expert at the instance of the plaintiff, but the report received from the expert was that the impressions were too blurred to be decipherable. The plaintiff then stated before the Court that if the defendant took an oath on the Ganges water that he had not borrowed the money from the plaintiff he would agree to the suit being dismissed. The defendant agreed to take the oath. On the oath being taken by the defendant the Court without going into any further evi...
Beni Ram Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All237
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision from a conviction of the accused under Section 500 of the Penal Code and a sentence of fine. The facts are not now much disputed. The complainant has a nephew whose daughter is of marriageable age. The accused wanted his son to get married to this girl but the complainant refused to comply with his request. The Courts below have found that this refusal was the cause of a malicious feeling in the mind of the accused. That finding has to be accepted. The accused arranged the betrothal of the girl with a relation of one Babu Lal and the marriage was about to take place. The complainant heard from various persons that the accused had been defaming him and telling people that he was keeping a woman Brahmin by caste as his mistress and was a bad character, and that if the marriage of his nephew's daughter were to take place the members of his caste would not join. The complainant accordingly sent for the accused on 16th November 1924, in the ...
Faujdar Mahto and anr. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All261
Mukerji, J.1. The first point argued in this appeal is that there is a mis-joinder of charges and the whole trial is vitiated by illegality.2. It appears to me that this argument is well-founded and must be given effect to although the point was not taken specifically in the memorandum of appeal.3. Briefly, the alleged facts are these: Two girls were kidnapped on different dates and they were passed off as Chattri girls on receipt of money from one Bishun Rai, who wanted a wife for himself and a wife for his brother. It is argued that the offences of kidnapping being separate offences the trial ordinarily ought to have been separate, under Section 233, Criminal P.C. There can be no doubt that this is correct provided the case does not come within Sections 234, 235, 236 and 139. Section 234, Criminal P.C., says that where more offences than one but of the same kind are committed within the space of 12 months, the offender can be tried for all the offences provided they do not exceed thr...
Faujdar Mahto and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1925
Reported in: 91Ind.Cas.815
Mukerji, J.1. The first point argued in this appeal is that there is a misjoinder of charges and the whole trial is vitiated by illegality.2. It appears to me that this argument is well-founded and must be given effect to, although the point was not taken specifically in the memorandum of appeal.3. Briefly, the alleged facts are these. Two girls were kidnapped on different dates and they were passed off as Chattri girls on receipt of money from one Bishun Rai, who wanted a wife for himself and a wife for his brother. It is argued that the offences of kidnapping being separate offences the trial ordinarily ought to have been separate, under Section 233 of the Cr.P.C. There can be no doubt that this is correct, provided the case does not come within Sections 234, 235, 236 or 239. Section 234 of the Cr.P.C. says that where more offences than one but of the same kind are committed within the space of 12 months the offender can be tried for all the offences provided they do not exceed three...
Beni Ram Vs. Emperor Through Hira Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.694
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision from a conviction of the accused under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and a sentence of fine. The facts are not now much disputed. The complainant has a nephew whose daughter is of marriageable age. The accused wanted his son to get married to this girl but the complainant refused to comply with his request. The Courts below have found that this refusal was the cause of a malicious feeling in the mind of the accused. That finding has to be accepted. The accused arranged the betrothal of the girl with a relation of one Babu Lal and the marriage was about to take place. The complainant heard from various persons that the accused had been defaming him and telling people that he was keeping a woman Brahmin by caste as his mistress and was a bad character and that if the marriage of his nephew's daughter were to take place the members of his caste would not join. The complainant accordingly sent for the accused on the 16th of November ...
Ram Nath Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-05-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All231; 94Ind.Cas.897
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a revision from a conviction of the applicant under Section 171-F of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was candidate at a Municipal election held at Muttra in March 1923. A person named Hari Shanker, was a voter on the electoral roll but he was not living at Muttra. Some person, who has not been traced by the police, came forward at the time of the election and professed to be Hari Shanker and put his thumb mark on the voting slip. The voting slip was attested by the applicant Ram Nath, the candidate himself. After Ram Nath was elected his election was contested before the Commissioner who set aside the election and directed the prosecution of Ram Nath under Sections 419 and 465, read with Section 109 of the I.P. C, that is to say cheating and abetment of forgery. Ram Nath was convicted by a First Class Magistrate and sentenced to two years' rigorous, imprisonment, On appeal the Sessions Judge acquitted him of the offence under Section 419, but maintained his ...
Chhidda and ors. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All225
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a criminal revision from convictions of the applicants under Section 147 and Section 323 read with 3. 149, I.P.C., and sentences of imprisonment and fines. The learned Sessions Judge on appeal has reduced the sentence so as to make the sentences of imprisonment under the two sections concurrent.2. It appears that the complainant Sri Ram, who had obtained a decree against Tursia and his son Loka, applied for attachment of the property of his judgment-debtors, and in the company of a commissioner, appointed by the Court went to the village to get the attachment effected. Naubat, one of the applicants, first tried to prevent the attachment on the ground that the cattle sought to be attached did not belong to the judgment-debtors but were his own property. The commissioner however warned him that if he interfered he might come to grief. After some consultation Naubat did not prevent the commissioner from attaching the cattle. But as soon as the attachment had been ma...
Chhidda and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.463
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a criminal revision from convictions of the applicants under Section 147 and Section 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentences or imprisonment and fines. The learned Sessions Judge on appeal has reduced thesentence so as to make the sentences or imprisonment under the two sections concurrent.2. It appears that the complainant Sri Ram who had obtained a decree against Tarsia and his son Loka applied for attachment of the property of his judgment-debtors, and in the company of a Commissioner, appointed by the Court went to the village to get the attachment effected. Naubat one of the applicants, first tried to prevent the attachment on the ground that the cattle sought to be attached did not belong to the judgment-debtors but were his own property. The Commissioner, however, warned him that if he interfered he might come to grief. After some consultation Naubat did not prevent the Commissioner from attaching the cattle. But as soon as the att...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »