Allahabad Court June 1936 Judgments
Ram Lal and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All651
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision by Ram Lal, Angnu Singh and Jit Bahadur Singh who have been convicted under Section 221, Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each. They were all three police constables. They were stationed at a certain outpost in which one of the constables attacked the head constable with a lathi and murdered him. The murderer's name was Chokhey Lal. The evidence is that the applicants were present when the murder was committed. An outsider called Sammu seized Chokhey Lal and grappled with him for a few moments, but the three applicants and others who were there would not go to his assistance so that Chokhey Lal released himself. It is said that he again attacked the head constable. In the meanwhile another constable Puttu had come to the place and he went off to make a report leaving the three applicants to see that Chokhey Lal who was still in the outpost did not escape. Chokhey Lal, however, did escape an...
Tag this Judgment!Ashfaq Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-16-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All707; 165Ind.Cas.25
ORDERAllsop, J.1. The applicant Ashfaq has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of Rs. 250 under Section 14, Dangerous Drugs Act, and to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months under Section 60, Excise Act, and he has also been directed to execute a bond for a period of two years. The allegation against him was that his house was searched and he was in possession of cocaine and charas contrary to law. The Magistrate found him guilty and he appealed to the Sessions Judge who dismissed his appeal. There is no reason why questions of fact should be re-agitated in this Court. Some points of law have been taken in the grounds of revision. One is that the search was not properly conducted because the two search witnesses were not respectable within the meaning of the Act. One of them, Bashir, is a Chaudhari of the Ekka-walas, and Ayub is a hawker. I do not think that respectability connotes any particular status or wealth or anything of that...
Tag this Judgment!Pirag Lal Vs. Rustam Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-11-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All658
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order acquitting four men. who were charged with the offences of criminal trespass and assault under Sections 447 and 352,I.P.C. The evidence for the prosecution and the evidence for the defence were taken by the Magistrate and he then fixed a date for the hearing of arguments. On that date the complainant did not appear but he was represented by counsel. The Magistrate was told by counsel that the complainant had gone to Farrukhabad to bathe in the Ganges and that he had expected to return on the date of hearing but had not appeared Counsel suggested that the complainant's presence was not necessary. The learned Magistrate refused to adjourn the case and he came to the conclusion under the provisions of Section 247, Criminal P.C., that in these circumstances he was bound to acquit the accused. He accordingly did so. The complainant appealed to the Sessions Judge, who found that he was not entitled to interfere with an ord...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanpal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-11-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All656
Allsop, J.1. This appeal is admitted-The appellant has been found guilty of deliberately attempting to shoot a man with a revolver and he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. He asks to be released on bail. The main argument is that the case against him is a weak one. I have looked at the judgment and I see that the learned Judge has discussed the evidence with great care, and at this stage it is impossible to say anything about the merits of the ease. The other point is that the applicant is only 19 years of age and that it will be unfortunate that he should be associated with bad characters in jail if ultimately it is found that he was not guilty. An argument of this kind certainly has some force, but after all it is an argument which could be raised in almost every case, because respectable men even if they are more than 19 years of age may suffer deterioration from detention in jail. I do not think that a man who is convicted of a crime of this t...
Tag this Judgment!Onkar Nath and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All675; 165Ind.Cas.148
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision. The applicants were tried under Section 323, I.P.C., and fined Rs. 50 each. They went up in revision to the Sessions Judge who rejected their application. They have come here with a second application. The first point urged is that one of the accused at the trial was a juvenile offender and it is said that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try a juvenile offender because he was not especially authorised by the Local Government under Section 8, Reformatory Schools Act. It is further argued that the whole trial was vitiated. The learned Sessions Judge refused to interfere because he pointed out that the juvenile offender had in any event been acquitted, but he certainly was prepared to hold that the argument was a sound one, upon the point that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the juvenile offender. I must make it very clear that I do not agree with this view. Section 8, Reformatory Schools Act, does not enact that a Magi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›