Allahabad Court September 1942 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.
Mewa Ram Vs. Emperor Through Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All13
ORDERAllsop, J.1. These are two references made by the learned Sessions Judge of Agra in which he has asked this Court to set aside one fine of Rs. 4 and another fine Rs. 2-8-0. It seems to me somewhat absurd to waste the time of this Court on matters of such little importance. The question only is whether a particular cart which was apparently licensed by the municipality could be said to have been kept or plied for hire within the municipality. The question arose because the cart was over-loaded according to the municipal by-laws. Learned Counsel on behalf of a person who was convicted says that the words 'for hire' must be read with the word 'kept' as well as with the word 'plying.' I can see no reason for holding that this must be so. The expression 'kept for hire' does not seem to me to be very natural. I should think, the meaning clearly is that all carts either kept in the municipality or kept outside but plying for hire in the municipality, are liable to be licensed. This parti...
Har NaraIn and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All20
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Jhansi. The applicants were tried before a Bench of Magistrates and sentenced to fine for offences under Sections 323, 342 and 324, Penal Code. The learned Magistrate in appeal set aside the convictions and sentences under Section 342. The learned Sessions Judge has referred the case to this Court with a recommendation that the convictions and sentences should be set aside upon the ground that the Bench which delivered judgment consisted of two members one of whom had not been present throughout the trial. He relied on the provisions of Section 350A, Criminal P. C. I may mention that that section does not say in what circumstances a judgment shall be invalid. It says that in certain circumstances it shall be valid. As far as I can see it refers only to a case where the whole constitution of a Bench has been changed during the time when the trial was pending, for instance if a Bench consists of seven members of whom ...
Rup Kishan Agha Vs. Secy. of State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All56
Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed by the Court below, but costs have not been awarded to the defendant. There is no appeal or cross-objection by the defendant with regard to the costs. The plaint, which seems to have been drafted by some one who had neither training nor practice in the drafting of pleadings, is not only prolix, but contains matters which are not relevant to the, reliefs actually prayed for. Some of these irrelevant matters are unfortunately such as may, not unjustifiably, be described as scandalous. The plaint is also in places far from intelligible. The material allegations may be stated thus. The plaintiff was in the service of the Crown in this province as a member of the judicial branch of the Provincial Service and retired in February 1934. He does not state when he entered the service. He alleges that during a period of seven years immediately preceding his retirement he had been 'working as a Sessions Sub-Judge and mostly...
Kauleshar Ahir Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All96
ORDERAllsop, J.1. Section 182, Penal Code, says nothing about cognizable or non-cognizable offences or anything of the kind. The only question is whether the report is false and whether it was calculated to induce the public officer to do something or omit something which he ought not to have done or omitted. In this case the finding is that the report of the loss of the cattle was false and that it was made with the object of diverting the attention of the sub-inspector from a charge against the applicant. Moreover, the finding is that the report induced the sub-inspector to register a case of suspected cattle theft and make an investigation which he ought not to have made if he had known the report to have been false. I see no reason to interfere. The reference is rejected. The papers may be returned to the Court below....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›