Allahabad Court September 1929 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.
Emperor Vs. Latoor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All33; 121Ind.Cas.549
1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Bijnor re-commeding the enhancement of sentence in the case of one Latoor who was convicted by a Magistrate of the First Class under Section 212, I.P.C. and, sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25.2. If the conviction was justified, there can be no doubt that the sentence passed by the learned Magistrate was grossly inadequate and the reference made by the learned Sessions Judge was throughty justified and proper.3. The reference is opposed by Latoor, who is represented by counsel. Mr. Roy challenges the propriety and legality of the conviction of Latoor under Section 212, I.P.C.4. The charge preferred against Latoor was that on or about 30th January 1929, he was found concealing and harbouring one Baldewa an absconded 'offender' under Sections 396 and 366, I.P.C. knowing or having reason to believe that the said person was an offender and absconder. We have been taken through the evidence on the record and we do not find that there are an...
Emperor Vs. Narbada Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All38; 121Ind.Cas.819
1. Pandit Narbada Prasad and Jagannath Prasad alias Kunnoo were charged before Mr. S.W. Bobb, First Class Magistrate of Allahabad, under Section 168, I.P.C., and Sections 168, I.P. C, and 168/109,. I.P. C, for contravention of Section 34, District Boards Act of 1922. The Magistrate acquitted both the accused.2. Section 34, District Boards Act reads as follows:(1) A member of the Board who otherwise than with the permission in writing of the Commissioner, knowingly acquires or continues to have directly, or indirectly by himself or his partner, any share or interest in any contract or employment with, by or on behalf of the Board, shall be deemed to have committed an offence under Section 168, I.P.C.3. An 'interest in a contract' we hold to mean a financial interest with profit or hope of profit from the contract as the object of the person interested. This must be inferred from the facts in evidence in each case.4. In the month of January 1928, the District Board of Banda was suspended...
Emperor Vs. Kashi Nath and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All161; 121Ind.Cas.547
1. This is the appeal on behalf of the Local Government. Two men, Kashi Nath and Chunni Lal, were acquitted on appeal by the learned Sessions Judge of Cawnpore of a charge of being in possession of cocaine, an excisable article, contrary to Section 60(a), United Provinces Excise Act. In this case both the Magistrate who originally tried the case and the learned Sessions Judge were in entire agreement upon the findings of fact; but the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that it was his duty to set aside the judgment of the learned Magistrate on this ground:I have no doubt that either both the brothers on one of them deals in cocaine, but itcan not be said that necessarily both the brothers are dealing and if one of the brothers is dealnig in cocaine which of them is so dealing2. The facts are that the two accused are brothers. They are members of a joint Hindu family, and they mess together and carry on a common business. It is admitted, at any rate, that the accused occupy a...
Emperor Vs. Timman and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All19
1. In this case Timman, Azmat and Summan were charged before Mr. Thomas, Magistrate of the First Class, Meerut, under Section 60(a), Excise Act, for being in possession of cocaine. It appears that the police, having obtained a warrant for the search of a gaming house, carried out the search and these three accused were there discovered, and on being searched packets of cocaine were found upon them. It has not been disputed by the accused that the cocaine was found upon thorn, and indeed it would have been impossible for them to dispute this fact. The learned Magistrate sentenced each of them to a fine of Rs. 75. The Local Government filed an application in revision asking for the enhancement of the sentence.2. It is pressed on behalf of the opposite party that this is a case of first offence with regard to all three. We are of opinion that the section of the Criminal Procedure Code dealing with first offenders should not be applied to the case of people discovered with cocaine and othe...
Mt. Bakhtawari Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All45
1. Mt. Bakhtawari was committed to the Court of Sessions at Meerut to take her trial under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C.2. The charge was that on 27th November 1928, she murdered one Harbans, chaukidar by throttling him; and that having reason to believe that Harbans had been murdered, she caused the evidence of the crime to disappear by burying the corpse of Harbans and his clothes etc. in a field adjoining the Guldhar railway station.3. The accused pleaded not guilty to both the charges.4. The case was tried by Mr. Raghunath Prasad who held Mt. Bakhtawari guilty of both the charges and sentenced her to transportation for life under Section 302, I.P. C, and to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 201, I.P.C.5. The central figure in the case is one Phool Singh, an Indian Christian, who with his wife Mt. Bhagwati and two children, one of whom is named Bendick alias Balwant lived in a house in mouza Dohai within the police circle of Ghaziabad. Bendick alias Balwant was his son by...
Emperor Vs. Bindeshwari Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All277
Young, J.1. Bindeshwari Singh was convicted by a Magistrate of the First Class under Section 384, I.P.C. for having extorted Rs. 10 from one Balle Halwai by holding out threats to him of physical injury and of the institution of legal proceedings charging him with the commission of a criminal offence. The learned Magistrate gave him the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100.2. The learned Sessions Judges reversed the decision of this trial Court and directed the acquittal of Bindeswari Singh.3. The Local Government has filed an appeal to this Court.4. The complaint which gave rise to these proceedings was instituted by one Balle Halwai of Deogaon on 29th August 1928. The story of the Crown it shortly this: Bindeshweri Singh purchased puris and sweets from the shop of Balle Halwai and owed him Rs. 10. A demand was made for the money. Bindeswari Singh took offence at this and told BalleI shall set you right. I shall get a false case brought against you and sh...
Ghasi and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All329
Sen, J.1. This is a reference by Mr. P.C. Agarwal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Moradabad, recommending that the conviction and sentence passed upon Ghasi, Dari and Gokul under Section 424, I.P. C, be set aside.2. One Umar Daraz had a, decree against Ganpat, Gangu and Dilsukh. In execution of the said decree, certain crops were attached and one Saadat was appointed shehna or bailiff to guard the crops. Ghasi, Dari and Gokul, in spite of resistance on the part of the shehna, cut and took away half the crops. The shehna lodged a complaint and the result was that Ghasi, Dari and Gokul were convicted under Section 424, I.P. C, and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 20 each. The plea put forward by the accused persons was that they had cultivated the crop and that there was nothing wrong, if they cut the crop and took the same away. The trial Court did not enter into the question whether the plea put forward by the accused was correct.2. The learned Magistrate in answer to the referring...
Emperor Vs. Kudua Bari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All37; 121Ind.Cas.559
1. Proceedings have been instituted against Kudua Bari under Section 110, Criminal P. C, on the allegation that he was a habitual burglar and thief and that his character was so desperate and dangerous that it was a menace to the community at large to allow him to remain without being bound over. Mr. Budh Sen,Magistrate, First Class of Mainpuri, under his order dated 22nd January 1929, held that the accused was a habitual thief and burglar but there was no evidence that he was so desperate and dangerous as to justify his being bound over on the second ground. The learned Magistrate ordered the accused to execute a personal bond for Rs. 200 with two sureties each in the same amount to be of good behaviour for a term of three years. The accused was not in a position to furnish security and the matter was placed before the learned Sessions Judge under Section 123(2), Criminal P.C.2. The judgment of the trial Court is an excellent model of what a judgment should not be. It is summary sketc...
Mt. Khuban Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All29
1. Mt. Khuban, Chand, Buddha and Bhanta alias Bhagwanta were committed to the Court of Sessions at Etah to take their trial under Section 302, I.P.C.2. Mr. Iftikhar Hussain, Additional Sessions Judge who heard the case, acquitted Buddha, Chand and Bhanta. He convicted Mt. Khuban and sentenced her to death.3. Mt. Khuban has appealed to this Court and the record has been submitted by the Sessions for confirmation of sentence.4. The Local Government has appealed from the judgment acquitting Bhagwanta alias Bhanta. No appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal regarding Chand and Buddha.5. On the night between 14th and 15th January 1929, one Mt. Jawwa and her two infant daughters aged seven years and five months respectively were murdered. It is clear that the murder was effected by more than one person. It was a cold-blooded murder, a murder premeditated, organized and executed with fiendish malignity.6. Syed Mohammad Mohsin Jaffery, Sub-Inspector posted at the. Etah Kotwali...
Durjan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All192; 121Ind.Cas.550
1. Durjan the appellant in this case, along with two others, all sweepers, were charged under Section 302, I.P.C., with murdering one Khilla before the Sessions Judge of Cawnpore. Manian and Lallu were acquitted, but Durjan was convicted and sentenced to death.2. We are not satisfied with the evidence in this case against the appellant. On 28th January of this year a dead body was discovered near village Baragaon. The dead body had wounds upon it and clearly there had been a murder committed. Part of the face of the corpse had been burnt. It is alleged that the dead body was that of Khilla who was missing from the village.3. We are not satisfied in the first place that this corpse was that of Khilla. No proceedings were taken for nearly two months after the discovery of the corpse, A photograph had been taken, however, of the corpse. The wife of Khilla was quite unable to identify the photograph as that of her husband. We have carefully examined this photograph and we are certainly of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »