Allahabad Court May 1949 Judgments
Jagannath Gupta Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All9
ORDERSeth, J.1. This application in revision is by one Jagannath Gupta who was convicted Under Section 411, Penal Code and sentented to one year's rigorous imprisonment. His conviction and sentence have been upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge of Kanpur.2. A theft was committed at the house of one Ganga Ram on the night between nth and 12th June 1947. The prosecution case is that the gold necklace, Ex. 1, is one of the items of property which was stolen during that theft. The police received information from one Rup Narain that the stolen necklace was in the possession of applicant Jagannath Gupta. The police party accompanied with Rup Narain and a First Class Magistrate, Mr. Shah Aziz Ahmad, went to the house of Jagannath Gupta. According to the prosecution case, the Sub-Inspector and Rup Narain both asked the applicant Jagannath Gupta to bring out the necklace which was given to him as his share of the theft. Jagannath Gupta hesitated for some time but when the Sub-Inspector thre...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Prasad and ors. Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1949
Reported in: 1949CriLJ934
ORDERSeth, J.1. There are eight applicants in this case. They have all been convicted of an offence under S. i, U. P. Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 197 for having contravened the provisions of Section 8 of that Order.2. the facts found are that a motor truck proceeding on the road from RathPanwari side towards Charkhari State was stopped at Mahoba. The truck was carrying certain food-grains and a few tins of ghee. The case for the prosecution was that the applicants were carry. ing or causing to be carried the foodgrains loaded in the truck from a place within the United Provinces to another place outside the United Provinces.3. The case set up on behalf of the defence was that the foodgrains were not being carried from any plaoe in the United Provinces, but were being carried from village Uudera in the Oharkhari State to Oharkhari proper in the Oharkhari Btate. The Courts below have recorded no finding on the point whether the defence version that the foodgrains were being take...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Prasad and ors. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All619
ORDERSeth, J.1. There are eight applicants in this case. They have all been convicted of an offence under Section 4, U.P. Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1947 for having contravened the provisions of Section 3 of that Order.2. The facts found are that a motor truck proceeding on the road from Rath-Panwari aide towards Charkhari State was stopped at Mahoba. The truck was carrying certain food-grains and a few tins of ghee. The case for the prosecution was that the applicants were carrying or causing to be carried the foodgrains loaded in the truck from a place within the United Provinces to another place outside the United Provinces.3. The case set up on behalf of the defence was that the foodgrains were not being carried from any place in the United Provinces, but were being carried from village Undera in the Charkhari State to Charkhari proper in the Charkhari State. The Courts below have recorded no finding on the point whether the defence version that the foodgraina were being ...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1949
Reported in: 1949CriLJ944
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. Babu appeals against his conviction under s, 436, Penal Code read with Sections 6 and 18, U. P. Act, XXlV [24] of 1947 and sentence of seven years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Bs. too and six stripes passed by a first class Magistrate of Mathura.2. The occurrence, which was the subject of the charge, had taken place at 9-45, on the morning of 27th October 1947, in Qasba Baldeo, one furlong from police station Baldeo. That was that the appellant had set fire to a fallen thatch belonging to himself which was resting on a wall over chabutra, five paces from his own residential be use.3. Lala Earn, p. w. 1, is saia to have sent a written slip to Pandit Mani Bhushan, the President of the local Congress Committee, who was also an Emergency Magistrate regarding tbis occurrence, and the latter then sent an information about it to the Sub-Inspector, Ch. Rudra Datt Tyagi, who, in his turn, lodged a report at the police station.4. The primary question before ...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All620
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. Babu appeals against his conviction under Section 436, Penal Code read with Sections 6 and 18, U.P. Act, XXIV [24] of 1947 and sentence of seven years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 500 and six stripes passed by a first class Magistrate of Mathura.2. The occurrence, which was the subject of the charge, had taken place at 9-45, on the morning of 27th October 1947, in Qasba Baldeo, one furlong from police station Baldeo. That was that the appellant had set fire to a fallen thatch belonging to himself which was resting on a wall over chabutra, five paces from his own residential house.3. Lala Ram, P.W. 1, is said to have sent a written slip to Pandit Mani Bhushan, the President of the local Congress Committee, who was also an Emergency Magistrate regarding this occurrence, and the latter then sent an information about it to the Sub-Inspector, Ch. Rudra Datt Tyagi, who, in his turn, lodged a report at the police station.4. The primary question before...
Tag this Judgment!MaqbooluddIn Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All5
ORDERMalik, C.J.1. These are two connected revisions against the convictions and sentences passed against the applicants Under Section 161, Penal Code. The case for the prosecution was that in June 1947, one Moizuddin found that a mare, which he had lost about two years before, was yoked to an ekka, which was being driven by one Buddhu. He stopped the ekka and asked Buddhu from where he had got the mare. Buddhu told him that he had bought it from one Sharda. A report was thereupon made to Maqbuluddin, head constable, at the George Town outpost. Maqbuluddin, according to the prosecution, approached Sharda and demanded a bribe and threatened Sharda that if he did not pay the money he would be prosecuted for theft of the mare. Sharda was the tenant of one Ganesh Dutt. Ganesh Dutt, Sharda and Vachaspati Tripathi, head clerk in the District Supply Office, decided to lay a trap and informed the Additional District Magistrate, Mr. D.S. Rathor that Maqbuluddin was demanding bribe. The Magistra...
Tag this Judgment!Nura and ors. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All710; 1950CriLJ29
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. Nura, aged 40, Azimuddin, 24 or 25, Ibrahim 35, Jumma 25, and Karma 60 or 62 years of age, the first being resident of village Harsauli, the second of village Nirmana and the others of village Kaserwa, district Muzaffar-nagar, appeal against their conviction and sentences passed by the learned Sessions Judge of that place. Appellant l was convicted Under Section 366, the second Under Sections 366 and 376, the third Under Sections 366 and 368, the fourth Under Sections 368 and 376, and the fifth Under Section 366, Penal Code each being sentenced to a period of three years' rigorous imprisonment, the same being cumulative in the caae of appellants 2 to 4.2. There were two other persons also tried with these appellants, Najmuddin and his wife Mt. Saeedan, but they were acquitted by the learned Judge.3. A girl named Hajra, aged about 12 or 13 years was alleged to have disappeared from the house of her father Alimuddin, 4 gharis after nightfall on 30th March 1947, in vil...
Tag this Judgment!Nanhey Mal Narottam Das Vs. Rex Through Lucknow Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All158
ORDER1. These six criminal revision applications may be disposed of by one common judgment as they raise the same question of law.2. The material facts lie within a short compass. Applications Nos. 18, 22 and 23 are made by Nanhey Mal-Narottom Dass and applications Nos. 19, 20 and 21 by Ram Adhin Mathura Prasad. Both the applicants were convicted under Section 299, U. P. Municipalities Act read with Rule 32, Terminal Tax Rules in force in the Lucknow Municipality. Rule 32 framed by the Government of the United Provinces in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 296, U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, for the assessment and collection of terminal tax published with notification No. 584/XI-D. T. 81, dated 25th February 1928, as subsequently amended, under the said Act, for the Lucknow Municipality runs as follows:'32. Any person--(a) who, subject to the condition of Rule 28 fails to pay on demand the terminal tax assessed on his goods under any of these rules, or(b) a person introducin...
Tag this Judgment!Gajadhar Singh Vs. Chunni and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All621; 1949CriLJ967
ORDERMalik, C.J.1. A tendency has now grown in this province to use B. 145, Criminal P. 0., with the object of getting into possession of the property so that the other side may be driven to figure as a plaintiff and may have to prove his- title. The Magistrates seem to have forgotten that 8. 115, Criminal P. C, was enaoted not with the object of giving one party an advantage over the other but with the primary object of preventing breach of the peace when such breach was apprehended.2. This reference arises out of an application which was filed as far back as 4th July 1916. There has been no breach of the peaoe so far and protracted evidence has been given by be to the parties to prove who was in possession of the property. The learned Magistrate has held that there was a likelihood of a breach of the peace and as he was not in a position to hold who was in possession of the property he has attached the property under Section 146, Criminal P. C, and directed the parties to have their ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Bhal Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All629
ORDERDesai, J.1. This application is directed against an interlocutory order passed by a Magistrate rejecting the applicant's application for a regular trial in place of summary trial, The applicant approached the Additional Sessions Judge, Kheri, who refused to interfere.2. On 1st May 1948, the Station Officer of Neem Gaon submitted a charge-sheet against the applicant for his prosecution under Section 60, Excise Act. It was stated in the charge-sheet that during the search of the applicant's house liquor was recovered and that it was found on analysis to be illicit. The charge-sheet was presented in the Court of the Magistrate through the prosecuting Sub-Inspector, who did not make any alteration in it. The Magistrate issued a summons against the applicant and he appeared in his Court on 27th July 1948. As the prosecution evidence was not present, the case was adjourned to 14th August 1948. On 27th July 1948, the Station Officer added a note on the back of the charge-sheet stating th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »