Allahabad Court August 1930 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.
Mt. Ram Kunwar and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All835; 129Ind.Cas.259
ORDERBennet, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Etah recommending that the convictions of five persons under Sections 147, 352 and 447,1. P.C., and sentences of one month's rigorous imprisonment and fines should be set aside. The ground of the recommendation is that the Honorary Third Class Magistrate before whom the accused were tried did not comply with the provisions of Section 526(8), Criminal P. C, because he did not grant a sufficient adjournment for the accused to apply for a transfer. This sub-section applies only where the complainant or the accused notifies to the Court before which the case is pending his intention to make an application under Section 526. Section 526, Sub-section (1) refers to the High Court, and the whole section deals only with applications for transfer made to the High Court. It has to be shown therefore by the applicant in revision that the Honorary Magistrate was informed that the accused intended to make an application to the Hi...
Ambika Prasad Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All7; 129Ind.Cas.369
King, J. 1. Ambika Prasad was accused of offences under Sections 186 and 353, I. P.C. for obstruction and assaulting a 'kurkamin' in the discharge of his duty. The trial was begun as that of a warrant case but after the two principal witnesses the amin and the decree-holder had been examined and cross-examined and the examination of the accused had been recorded, the Magistrate found that the evidence did not support a conviction under Section 353 and therefore framed no charge but ordered that the case should proceed (as a summons case) in respect of the offence under Section 186 only. The defence was an alibi which the Magistrate had good grounds for disbelieving. He found an offence under Section 186 clearly established by the evidence of three eyewitnesses and convicted the accused.2. The Sessions Judge of Banda recommends that the conviction be set aside because the Magistrate should have framed a charge under Section 186 and should thus have given the accused an opportunity of cr...
Brij Nandan and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-01-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All9
Bennet, J.1. This is an appeal through counsel on behalf of Brij Nandan and from jail on behalf of Ram Prasad each of whom has been sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 232 and Section 235, I.P.C., and to five years' concurrent rigorous imprisonment under Section 243, I. P.C. These offences relate to false coining. The evidence for the prosecution consists of the statements of the Circle Inspector and Sub-Inspector and other police officers of Pilibhit city to the effect that they received information that false coining was taking place at the house of the accused Ram Prasad in Pilibhit city. A party of the police, with four search witnesses from the locality, Phulchand, Khubchand, Shambhunath and Chidda, went to the house of Ram Parsad and found Ram Prasad in the shop on the ground floor, and in that shop there was a furnace, a light and a fan attached to the wall and five counterfeit rupees and some genuine coins and instruments of counterfeiting consisting o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›