Allahabad Court May 1951 Judgments
Suraj Prasad and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-30-1951
Reported in: 1954CriLJ1377
ORDERP.L. Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Seasons Judge, Sitapur in the following circumstances : A criminal case was pending in the Panchaiti Adalat between Suraj Prasad and Mukta Prasad. Suraj Prasad made an application for transfer of the case from the Panchaiti Adalat. The application for transfer came up for hearing before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Misrikh at Sitapur, When the application was taken up for hearing by the Magistrate, Suraj Prasad & Mukta Prasad began to exchange hot words in court. Ram Prasad joined his brother, Suraj Prasad. Thereupon the Magistrate drew up a 'rubkar' initiating proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against Suraj Prasad, Ram Prasad and Mukta Prasad. This 'rubkar' is dated 29-9-1950. On the same date the Magistrate drew up a notice under Sections 112/107 of the Code calling upon Suraj Prasad, Ram Prasad and Mukta Prasad to show cause why they may not be ordered to execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,0...
Tag this Judgment!Jayanti Prasad Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All793
Agarwala, J.1. This is an application of one Jayanti Prasad Srivastava, an employee in the Civil Supplies Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh, for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh, the District Magistrate of Mirzapur and the District Supply Officer of Mirzapur, not to terminate the services of the applicant without complying with Article 311, Sub-clause (2) of the Constitution of India, and praying further that the notice of termination of service dated 26th April 1951 given by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, be declared to be inoperative and bad in law. The facts disclosed in the affidavit submitted along with the application are as follows.2. The applicant is employed as supply inspector in the District Supply Office at Mirzapur. On the 24th April 1951, the Hon'ble Sri Chandra Bhan Gupta, Minister for Food and Civil Supplies, State of Uttar Pradesh visited the district of Mirzapur. At the instance of the said Minister, the applicant was ser...
Tag this Judgment!Babulal and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All146
ORDERP.L. Bhargava, J.1. This application in revision has been filed by Babu Lal and Madhusudan, who were charged and tried for an offence punishable under Section 435, Penal Code, by a Magistrate of the first class of Mohamdi, in Kheri district. The learned Magistrate found them guilty, convicted them of the offence with which they were charged and sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to a fine of Rs. 100.2. The case for the prosecution was as follows: On the night between 17th and 18th March 1950, at about 10 p.m., the applicant Madbusudan went to Dal Chand alias Dalla a tongawala, and asked him to get ready his tonga as he had to go somewhere. Dalla refused saying that his horse was tired and he himself was unwell. This is said to have annoyed Madhusudan, who threatened Dalla to see him and break his limbs. Dalla and his wife, Shanti, went to sleep in their house. Dalla's horse was, as usual, tethered in a double-thatched shed (bangla) near his house. Abo...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Ram Khelawan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1951
Reported in: AIR1953All555
Agarwala, J.1. This is an appeal by Ram Khelawan against his conviction under Section 304, Part II, Penal Code and a sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment.2. Originally four persons were tried by the learned Sessions Judge. Sheo Ram, Pyarey and Dodwa were acquitted and Ram Khelawan appellant alone was convicted.3. The prosecution case was that on 2-8-1949 one Baghunath, Smt. Kanchanya and Nankoo were grazing their cattle on an 'usar' and 'parti' land in village Lachhmanpur, The 'usar' and 'parti' land belonged to the zamindar, Raja Saheb of Asothar, and the cattle of the entire village used to graze on it as a matter of right. When the cattle were grazing Sheo Ram, his sons Pyarey and Ram Khelawan and one Dodwa alias Ram Ratan, a , nephew of Sheo Ram, came there and objected to the cattle grazing on a piece of land on which they had their own preserved grass. They then rounded up the cattle of Raghunath and Kanchanya and drove them away towards the cattle pound. Raghunath prot...
Tag this Judgment!Sagar Mal and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All816
Malik, C.J.1. This application was filed on behalf of Sagar Mal, Mool Chand and Girdhar Gopal.2. The applicants have been convicted under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act XXIV [24] of 1946 read with Clause 8 (iii), Government of India, Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1946, and further read with Clause 3 (ii) and Clause (10), Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order of 1948. All the three applicants were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 and Sagar Mal was further sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment. The application was filed by Mr. Suraj Nath Singh, advocate, on behalf of all the three applicants, Sagar Mal, Mool Chand and Girdhar Gopal. Sagar Mal has, however, not surrendered to his bail and probably he is absconding. Mr. Pathak, who had been recently briefed for the applicants, has stated that he withdraws his memo of appearance for Sagar Mal. Mr. Suraj Nath Singh has also no instructions to proceed on behalf of Sagar Mal. As Sagar Mal ...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhya Lal Vs. Vishwanath Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All91
ORDERMalik, C.J. 1. This revision is against an order of discharge. A complaint under Section 420, Penal Code, was filed by the applicant on 14-2-1947, in the Court of the City Magistrate, Allahabad. The complaint was put up for final orders before the Magistrate on 3-4-1947, when the Magistrate passed the following order: 'Complainant is absent. I waited for him till 1.15 P. M. Accused are present. Dismissed. Accused are discharged. Accused are contending that the case is of a civil nature & that a case has been instituted in proper Court.' A revision was filed against that order in the Court of the learned Ses. J. In the memo of Revision it was mentioned that the complainant was present in the Court-room till 12.35 P. M. when lie left the Court & when he returned at 1. 25 P. M. final orders in the case had already been passed, but it does not appear from the order-sheet that any such representation was made to the Magistrate on 3-4-1947, when the order was passed by him. No affidavit...
Tag this Judgment!Eknath Vs. Jivraj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-1951
Reported in: 1951CriLJ1358
ORDERSuryanarayana Rao, J.1. This is a revision petition in the course of proceedings to prevent breach of peace under Section 148, Hyderabad Criminal P.C. corresponding to Section 145 of the Indian Code. The proceedings were instituted on 95-5-1949 in the Court of Munsiff Magistrate Naldrug & the disputed land is situtated in the village Kowtali. During the pendenoy of the proceedings, the village was transferred to the province of Bombay in pursuance of the India Hyderabad (Exchange of Enclaves)' Order, 1950 as from 25 1-1950. Inspite of the said transfer, the Munsiff-Magistrate Naldrug continued to exercise jurisdiction & on 30-12-1960 directed possession of the property to be given to the first party. The respondent (sic.) demurs & has come in revision. His legal contention is that by reason of the transfer of the said tillage to the Bombay State, the Munsifi- Magistrate ceased to have jurisdiction & it is the Bombay Court having territorial jurisdiction over the land in dispute th...
Tag this Judgment!Ajudhia Prasad Vs. Chhotey Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All85
ORDER1. One Govind Singh was murdered under circumstances mentioned in the judgment of the learned Ses. J. There was an appeal in this Court & there was a difference of opinion between the two learned Judges constituting the Bench. The case was then referred to a third learned Judge &, on the return of the finding, there was again a difference of opinion as to the sentence. The case had to go back again to the same learned Judge who was of the opinion that the opposite party should be convicted under S. 323, Penal Code, & given the maximum punishment of one year's rigorous imprisonment. It is against this order that the father of Govind Singh has made this application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.2. In our view, it is not open to a third party, even if he be the father of the deceased, to move an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The first information report was lodged by the Chaukidar of the village & the case was sent up by the police & was not started...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Badal Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All82
ORDERP.L. Bhargava, J.1. This application in revision is directed against an order of conviction, under Section 4, U.P. Prevention of Adulteration Act, (VI (6) of 1912), recorded by a Magistrate of First Class of Gonda & upheld by the learned Ses. J. of the same place.2. The applicant had sold 'ghee' which, on a chemical analysis, was found to be 'grossly adulterated.' The report of the public Analyst shows that the sample of the 'ghee' sold by the applicant contained matter of ingredient, viz., fat & oil, which was different from & not of the same nature, substance or quality as 'ghee.'3. The sole point for consideration in this revision is whether the conviction is justified on a correct interpretation of Section 4, U. P. Prevention of Adulteration Act, which is in these terms:'4 (1) Whoever sells to the prejudice of the purchaser any article of food or any drug which is notof the nature, substance or quality of the article or drug demanded by such purchaser, or sells or offers or ex...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Board Gonda Through Its Chairman Vs. Bachchu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All736
Kidwai, J.1. The Municipal Board of Gonda owns some shops and a compound collectively designated the Sabzimandi in the City of Gonda, By resolution No. 7 (1) dated 1-8-1940, it agreed to grant under certain conditions a contract to 'Bachchu, alias Nabi Bux, for the realisation of the Municipal dues leviable in this mandi from 1-8 19(SIC)0 to 31-3-1942 in consideration of a payment of Rs. 1000 upto 31-3-1941, & another sum of Rs. 1000 for the ensuing year. 2. It is agreed that the contract was never reduced to writing nor was it signed as required by Section 97, Municipalities Act, but Bachchu was placed in possession of the Sabzimandi & began making his realisations. He also paid up the sum of Rs. 1000 for the period ending on 31-3-1941, but failed to pay the renaming Rs. 1000. Consequently, on 3-6-1942, the Municipal Board of Gonda instituted Suit No. 119 of 1942 in the Court of the Munsif, Gonda, for recovery of Rs. 1000. 3. The deft, raised a large number of pleas including a plea t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »