Allahabad Court May 1933 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 Kali Vs. Kripa Shanker and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-30-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All615
Kendall, J.1. The present application is made by one Mt. Ram Kali for the revision of an order passed by a First Class Magistrate of Bareilly in a case under Section 133, Criminal P.C. Briefly the facts are that Mt. Ram Kali had put up some turnstiles on a plot of land which admittedly is her property and thus obstructed a route or path which passes over her land to a temple known as Tapeshwarnath temple. An application under-S.133, Criminal P.C., was made to the Magistrate by the managing committee of the temple and a number of residents of the locality consisting mostly of railway employees living in the railway quarters in that neighbourhood and the procedure adopted by the Magistrate was as follows:The application having been made on 13th January 1932, he inspected the locality on 15th January, and apparently had some conversation with the parties. On 19th February certain documents were filed on behalf of Mt. Ram Kali. A notice under Section 133, Criminal P.C., was issued to her o...
Emperor Vs. R.N. Basu (for B. Parshottam Das Tandon)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-29-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All614; 145Ind.Cas.738
ORDERKendall, J.1. This application is connected with Criminal Revision No. 107 of 1933 Vide : AIR1933All612 Ed. and has been made like that by Mr. R.N. Basu, Secretary of the District Bar Association, Allahabad, on behalf of the accused B. Parshottam Das Tandon, who was fined Rs. 200 under Section 32, Police Act, by the City Magistrate of Allahabad. I have discussed in the connected case the question of whether an application for revision can be entertained by the High Court without having been presented in the Sessions Court, and held that in certain specified cases an application may be entertained, and I have held further that even where an accused person, as in this present case, refuses to plead and shows himself ready to be sent to jail, it is nevertheless the duty of the Court to sift the evidence for the prosecution and to refuse to convict the accused if the evidence is insufficient to prove a definite offence, not only because this proceeding is required by the law but also ...
R.N. Basu (for B. Parshottam Das Tandon) Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-29-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All612; 145Ind.Cas.736
Kendall, J.1. This is an application made by one, Mr. R.N. Basu, as Secretary of the District Bar Association of Allahabad, for the revision of a.n order of a Magistrate convicting B. Parshottam Das Tandon of an offence under Section 17(2), Criminal Law Amendment Act, and sentencing him to six months' R.I. That term of imprisonment has, I understand, already been served and the application is made on legal and technical grounds. A preliminary objection of some difficulty has been raised to the hearing of the application on the ground that no application was first made to the Sessions Judge. In the case of Sharif Ahmad v. Qabul Singh AIR 1921 All 30, it has been laid down by a Bench of this Court as a rule of practice that an application to the lower Court should be considered an essential step in the procedure, and that should be so, whether the District Magistrate or the Sessions Judge has power to grant the relief or not:In future therefore failure on the part of the applicant to sub...
Hikmat Ali and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All389
1. This case has been heard in connexion with Criminal Revision No. 246 of 1933, but as the points for consideration in the two cases are quite distinct we have preferred to deal with them in separate judgments. The two applicants were accused of an offence under Section 323, Penal Code, in what is said to be a counter case to the one dealt with in Criminal Revision No. 246 of 1933. The Magistrate found the applicants guilty and sentenced them to small fines, and further demanded security under Section 106, Criminal P.C. The learned Sessions Judge has referred the matter to us with a recommendation that the conviction and sentence passed on the applicants and the order passed under Section 106, Criminal P.C., be set aside. The reasons given are that the proceedings were irregular or illegal because the statement of the applicant, Aslahuddin, was never recorded by the trying Magistrate, and further that the Magistrate did not stay proceedings when an application was made under Section 5...
NaziruddIn and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All609
Kendall, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order of Mr. L. G. Lyde, City Magistrate of Cawnpore, who convicted the applicant's of offences under Section 323, Penal Code and sentenced them to small fines, and further passed an order binding them over to keep the peace under Section 106, Criminal P.C. The Sessions Judge has already rejected an application for revision. So far as the facts of the case are concerned, it is only necessary to state that the applicants and the opposite parties have a quarrel which dates back over 30 years and that there has been a great deal of litigation between them. The incident out of which this case arose has been decided by the City Magistrate in accordance with the statements of the witnesses before him and we see no reason to examine them in order to decide in revision whether his decision appears to be justified by the evidence. The point that has been argued before us is a legal one, namely, whether the Magistrate was legally justif...
Emperor Vs. Gyan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All24
ORDERKendall, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Magistrate of Cawnpore asking the Court to set aside an order passed by a Sub-Divisional Officer of that district by which he discharged certain persons who had been brought before him under Section 109, Criminal P.C. The circumstances were briefly that the persons who were prosecuted before the Magistrate had been discovered by the Police travelling together by night in a motor lorry, and certain arms are said to have been in their possession at that time. The first information report was made on 10th May 1932 at midnight under Section 399, Penal Code; but a second report was made on 4th July in which the case under Section 399 appears to have been dropped and it was alleged against the persons arrested that they had been hiding themselves inside the lorry and had been in possession of arms in order to commit some offence. The Magistrate found that all these persons had given their correct names and addresses to the police an...
Emperor Vs. Gayan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1933
Reported in: 147Ind.Cas.433
Kendall, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Magistrate of Cawnpore asking the court to set aside an order passed by a Sub-Divisional Officer of that District by which he discharged certain persons who had been brought before him under Section 109, Criminal Procedure Code. The circumstances were briefly that the persons who were prosecuted before the Magistrate had been discovered by the Police travelling together by night in a motor lorry, and certain arms are said to have been in their possession at that time. The First Information Report was made on May 10,1932, at midnight under Section 399, Indian Penal Code, but a second report was made on July 4, in which the case under Section 399 appears to have been dropped and it was alleged against the persons arrested that they had been hiding themselves inside the lorry and had been in possession of arms in order to commit some offence. The Magistrate found that all these persons had given their correct names and addresses to th...
Mt. Bafatan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All617
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Mirzapur, recommending that the conviction of Mt. Bafatan under Section 185, Municipalities. Act (Local Act 11 of 1916 as amended by Act 2 of 1919), and the sentence, of. fine of Rs. 15 passed on her beset aside. The reference came up before a learned Judge of this Court who referred it to a Bench of two Judges. The facts giving rise to the reference are as follows: By an application, dated 14th January 1931, Mt. Bafatan notified her intention to the Chunar Notified Area Committee to construct enclosure walls and a kothri in her house and prayed for permission to make the said constructions. B. Baldeo Prasad, the Vice President of the Notified Area Committee, inspected the-locality on 23rd January 1931, and. reported that the permission prayed for should be granted on certain conditions. The report was put up before B. Mathura Prasad, the President of the Notified Area, who before passing orders decided to inspect the local...
Mt. Jaimala Kunwar and anr. Vs. Collector of Saharanpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All4
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application in revision and arises under the following circumstances : A suit was instituted by the Collector of Saharanpur on behalf of the estate of Lala Janeshwar Das, the owners of the estate, for the time being, Janeshwar Das's two widows, Mts. Jai Mala Kunwar and Ohando Kunwar. The suit was No. 6 of 1932 in the Court of the First Subordinate Judge of Saharanpur. It was alleged that the last male owner of the property in suit was one Deep Chand and on the death of his widow Mt. Dhani Kunwar the property devolved on Janeshwar Das and Badri Das, two brothers, in equal shares. The suit was directed inter alia to obtaining a declaration that one of the Jat defendants, Atma Ram who professed to have been adopted by Dhani Kunwar, was not at all adopted and that Janeshar Das and Badri Das were entitled to the property, and on the death of Janeshwar Das and Badri Das their widows were entitled to recover the property. The widow of Badri Das, Mt. Phulwanti, was mad...
Manabendra Nath Roy Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All498
Thoms, J.1. The appellant Manabendra Nath Roy was tried in the Court of Session at Cawnpore on a charge under Section 121-A, Penal Code. He was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge and sentenced to transportation for 12 years. The charge preferred against him was that on or about 9th May 1923 and before and after, that is to say, from the beginning of 1921 to the end of 1924 he formed a conspiracy and conspired to deprive the King-Emperor of his Sovereignty of British India by means of violent revolution. The case for the prosecution against the appellant is that between the years 1921 and 1924, in co-operation with a number of other persons in India, the appellant who was in Europe, resolved to embark upon an attempt to introduce the doctrine of communism into India, the final objective of the conspirators being to set up a communist state in India a state which would be controlled by the workers and peasants. The institution of such a communist regime was to be preceded by the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »