Allahabad Court June 1947 Judgments
Chandra Ballabh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-30-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All105
ORDERMalik, J.1. The dispute between the parties related to a water channel, which has been marked 'CD' by the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate has found that both the parties had been making use of the water flowing along 'CD.' He was, however, unable to determine from the evidence on the record what arrangement, if any, existed between the parties with regard to it. The parties had been fighting about another portion of the water channel and that was amicably settled with the assistance of the learned Magistrate. But soon after the settlement of that dispute this fresh dispute arose about this bit of the water channel. As the learned Magistrate was not able to put any party in exclusive possession and he found that it would be extremely dangerous to leave the matter to the parties who were bent upon creating trouble, he decided to confirm the order of attachment passed by him on 17-5-1946, and restrained both the parties from making use of the water along the water course '...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Sumer Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All78
ORDERMalik, J.1. This application under Section 491, Criminal P.C. was moved before me on 29-5-1947. The allegation made in the affidavit was that the applicant had not been supplied with the grounds for his arrest as was necessary under Section 5, U.P. Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act (4 [iv] of 1947). The matter came up before me on 13-6-1947 and the Deputy Government Advocate was not then in a position to supply the information required. I therefore, gave him ten days' time and directed that the nature of the information given and the date on which the information was supplied and proof thereof should be placed before me within ten days. Today, Mr. Bhatt on behalf of the Deputy Government Advocate has produced the notice that was served on Sumer Singh on or about 1-4-1947. I find that the District Magistrate has got a form typed which probably is handed over to each accused with the object of com-plying with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act. The carbon copy of the f...
Tag this Judgment!Salet Singh Vs. Bali Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All114
ORDERMalik, J.1. The mukhia of a certain village having died, four persons sought to be appointed in his place. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed orders appointing one of them. One of the unsuccessful candidates went to the Additional District Magistrate in revision. The Additional District Magistrate has now made this reference to this Court, suggesting that the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate appointing the mukhia should be set aside.2. Mr. L.M. Roy has opposed this reference on the ground that no revision lies and the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was an executive order. A mukhia is appointed under Sub-section (3) of Section 45, Criminal P.C., and in accordance with the rules framed by the Provincial Government which are contained in chap. 3 of the Manual of Government Orders, vol. 1 it has been already held in In the matter of Damma ('07) 29 All. 563 that such an order is an. executive order and no revision can be entertained under Section 435, Crim...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-23-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All94
ORDERMalik, J.1. The learned Sessions Judge of Jhansi has made this reference on the ground that the Magistrate had no power under Section 146, Criminal P.C., to order the attachment of the trees which had already been severed from the earth In Khata Khewat No. 6, patti Raghubar, mahal Rao Pahar Singh, village Patha, there are a large number of trees of various kinds which, it is claimed by the complainant, belong to certain minors. The complaint was filed by their guardian. The allegations were that Bhagwan Das and Gorey Lal Brahmans of village Piparia in collusion with Gaya Prasad, son of Bindraban began to cut those trees on 21st and continued to do so on 22-1-1946. He asked them to desist from cutting the trees, but the accused threatened him saying that they would kill and be killed but would not desist from cutting the trees. There was, therefore, an apprehension of the breach of the peace and the complainant prayed that the police might be asked to attach the trees pending the d...
Tag this Judgment!Burha and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-11-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All93
ORDERMalik. J.1. The applicants have been convicted under Sections 3 and 4, U.P. Public Gambling Act, and three of them have been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 75 each, and the others to pay fines of Rs. 50 each, and in default to undergo one week's rigorous imprisonment.2. Learned Counsel for the applicants had urged that the conviction must be set aside as the case was tried by the learned City Magistrate of Benares who had issued the warrant for the search of the premises where the gambling was taking place. It is a fact that Mr. B.B. Lal, City Magistrate, Benares, had issued the search warrant and the case was tried by him, but no such objection to his trying the case was taken at the trial, nor was any such point raised before the learned Sessions Judge in the appeal against the order of the learned City Magistrate. Learned Counsel has, however, urged that the trial is illegal and it cannot, therefore, stand and the' case must be sent back for a retrial. I do not agree with his c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›