Allahabad Court May 1956 Judgments
Lalit Kumar Vs. S.S. Bose
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All398; 1957CriLJ701
ORDERJames, J.1. This application by Mr. Lalit Kumar, a pleader of Bareilly, is under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. and seeks the expunction of certain derogatory remarks against him contained in the judgment dated the 13th March 1956 by Mr. S. S. Bose, Assistant Sessions Judge, in sessions trial No. 80 of 1955, State v. Dhani and Mool Chand, under Section 392 I.P.C. The application has been, sponsored by the Bar Association of Bareilly.2. The applicant is a panel pleader, i.e., in the absence of regular State Counsel he appears for the State in certain criminal cases and receives a daily fee, which I understand is Rs. 24/- for a full day's work arid Rs. 12/- for work upto 1 p.m. He was appearing on behalf of the State in the aforementioned sessions trial before Mr. Bose.3. The circumstances in which this appli-cation has arisen are not disputed, and indeed will be found in Mr. Bose's own judgment. .4. The case was heard on the 27th and 28th February 1956 and, was adjourned for the following d...
Tag this Judgment!Rudder and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All239; 1958CriLJ1556
V. Bhargava, J. 1. During the hearing of this appeal it was pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants had been seriously prejudiced as the learned Sessions Judge during the trial had disallowed a certain question being put to one of the Important witnesses named Satya Narain. 2. According to the prosecution, the murder of Pahlad took place in a ghar while he was sleeping on a cot, and only other two persons who were in the ghar at the time of the murder were Sardar Lal and Satya Narain who were also sleeping on two different cots a few paces away from the cot of Pahlad. Sardar Lal and Satya Narain are two of the witnesses on whose statements the prosecution relies to prove the case against the appellants. The murder is said to have been committed by Rudder appellant by firing two shots at Pahlad. Sardar Lal in his evidence stated that he woke up on hearing the sound of a shot being fired and thereafter saw the appellants running away which implies that he di...
Tag this Judgment!Nando and ors. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1956
Reported in: 1957CriLJ247
ORDERRoy, J. 1. This is an application by Nanda and five others for the exercise of the revisional powers of this Court under Sections 435/439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The applicants were tried by the Panchayati Adalat of Birauri for offences punishable under Section 379, I, P. C. They were convicted under that section and each of them was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50/-. The matter was taken up in revision before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Bilgram. The Magistrate refused to interfere. The applicants were therefore driven to the necessity of making the present application.2. The facts and circumstances which have given rise to this application are these. Hari Shanker, Meghraj Chaube and Shambhu Dayal residents of Bilgram held a lease executed by the Court of Wards, Bhagaitapur Estate in district Hardoi, of a part of the low-lying land in village Birauri, This low-lying land gets inundated during the rainy season and wat...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal and ors. Vs. Kashi Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1956
Reported in: 1957CriLJ273
ORDERRoy, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Barabanki arising out of proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sessions Judge has recommended that the order dated the 25th August, 1955, passed by the Magistrate directing that Mohan Lal, Sahjoo, Ram Bharosey, Ram Samp and Buddhi be summoned for 7-9-1955, be set aside.2. The facts giving rise to this matter are these. Kashi Ram moved an application against Mohan Lal and 15 others for action under Section 107, Cr. P.C. read with Section 117 of the Code, The learned Magistrate sent the application to S. O. Kothi for a report. The Station Officer of P. S. Kothi made a report on the 14th August, 1955, which was to the effect that it was Kashi Ram who was acting in a high-handed manner and that there was no apprehension of a breach of the peace on the part of Mohan Lal and 15 others against whom the application had been made by Kashi Ram.The learned Magistrate without taking any furth...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Sheo Prasad Jaiswal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All583; 1956CriLJ1149
Mohkotra, J.1. Sheo Prasad Jaiswal and Loknath Singh were convicted by Sri N.C. Jain, Magistrate, First Class, Banaras. The former was found guilty under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act for violation of an order fixing prices of mustard oil and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 5000, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.The latter was found guilty under S. 8 of the said Act for abetment of the same offence and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Both the parties went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge of Banaras who allowed the appeal and set aside their convictions and sentences. The present appeal has been filed by the State against the order of the Sessions Judge.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Sheo Prasad Jaiswal, opposite party 1, is the sole proprietor of the firm Hindustan Oil Mills, Banaras, which held a 'B' class licence under the U. P. Oilseeds and Oilseeds Products Cont...
Tag this Judgment!Hansraj and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All641; 1956CriLJ1267
ORDERRoy, J. 1. Tese four criminal revisions raise common question of law. They have been heard together and may be disposed of by one judgment.2. On the 29th of March, 1955, between 7 and 8 p.m. certain licensed porters of the Char-Bagh railway station, Lucknow, presumably with a view tohave certain grievances redressed, adopted what was contended on behalf of the prosecution civil disobedience or passive resistance (Satyagraha). They were arrested for offences alleged to have been committed by them under Sections 120 and 121, Railways Act and were put into prison. Two sets of these persons were tried within the jail precincts on the 30th of March, 1955, and the other two-sets were tried on the 31st of March, 1955. The trial was held under the summary provisions of the Code. These persons were found guilty and convicted under the two sections. They were fined Rs. 50/- each under Section 120/- and Rs. 100/- each under Section 121, in default of payment of which they were directed to un...
Tag this Judgment!Chaubey Satgur Das Rao Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-1956
Reported in: [1958]34ITR880(All)
MOOTHAM C.J. - This is an application under section 24(4) of the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act against the refusal of the Revision Board to state a case for the opinion of this court.On March 25, 1949, the assessee was assessed to agricultural income-tax in respect of the assessment year 1948-49 on his income for the previous year ending June 30, 1948. Against the assessment he preferred an application in revision under section 22 of the Act to the Agricultural Income-tax Board. This application was dismissed on October 16, 1952. The assessee thereafter filed an application to the Board under section 24(2) asking it to refer to this court certain questions of law which the assessee contended arose out of the Boards order of October 16, 1952. This application was rejected by the Board on March 9, 1953, on the ground that it was barred by time and the Board did not express any opinion on the merits of the application. The assessee then filed the application which is now before us. In ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Baboo Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All571; 1956CriLJ1143
Mulla, J.1. This is a reference made by the Additional City Magistrate, Lucknow, under Section 432, Cr. P. C. for a decision on a point of law whether the Dramatic Performances Act (Act 19 of 1876) has become void or not in view of Article 13, Constitution of India.2. It was contended before the Magistrate that the above mentioned enactment had become inconsistent with the fundamental rights regarding freedom of speech and expression guaranteed to every citizen under Article 19, Constitution of India. The learned Magistrate in his reference observed :''........ it is debatable that the Dramatic Performances Act, 1876 is inconsistent with the provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India and I consider that the said Act is invalid. The question of the validity of the Dramatic Performances Act is necessary to be determined for the disposal of this case.'3. The reference came up for hearing before one of us and as the question to be decided was whether an existing enactment had beco...
Tag this Judgment!Sarju Prasad Behari Lal and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1956
Reported in: [1956]7STC665(All)
Mootham, C.J.1. Eighteen applications on revision were made to the Judge (Rivisions), Sales Tax, under Section 10 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. Instead of finally disposing of these applications the Judge (Revisions) has made a consolidated reference to this Court and has asked for the decision by it of two questions of law. The question is whether such a reference is competent.2. Section 11 of the Act, as in force at the material time, made provision for the reference to this Court by the Revising Authority of a question of law arising out of an order made by the Judge (Appeals) under Sub-section (3) of Section 9 or by the Judge (Rivisions) under Sub-section (1) of Section 10; and it is common ground that the application now before us is not an application under Section 11.3. The learned Standing Counsel contends however that the application can be entertained by this Court under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 141 of the Code which provides that 'the p...
Tag this Judgment!Ajodhya Prasad Bhargava Vs. Bhawani Shanker Bhargava and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-08-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All1
Agarwala, J. 1. The facts of the case which led to the reference to this Full Bench, briefly stated, are these.2. Ajodhya Prasad Bhargava, defendant appellant, entered into an agreement with a joint Hindu family of which Ram Das was the karta and which owned a business concern known as H. Bevis & Co., for the advance of certain monies to the latter.Under the agreement Ajodhya Prasad Bhargava was to receive interest on the sum advanced and was to have the control and management of the concern, H. Bevis & Co. Ajodhya Prasad Bhargava did not possess sufficient funds to enable him to discharge the obligations under the agreement and he, therefore, approached the plaintiff-respondent Bhawani Shanker Bhargaya, a relation, for investing some money in the business of H. Bevis & Co.The resDondent paid a certain sum either tothe appellant, or at his suggestion, to Messrs. H. Bevis & Co. For the recovery of the money remaining due to the respondent he instituted the suit which has given ri?e to t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »