Allahabad Court February 1971 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.
Abdul Hai Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1367
ORDERS.D. Khare, J.1. This is an application in revision directed against an order dated 22nd September, 1969, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor, allowing the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence of the present applicant Under Section 5/26 of the Indian Forest Act and remanding the case to the court of the Magistrate to give the prosecution an opportunity to prove that the disputed land was part of reserved forest. The learned Sessions Judge in his order further directed that the finding of the Magistrate that the land had been freshly ploughed by the applicant was confirmed.2. The court below was satisfied that plot No. 6/3 which was a portion of plot No. 6, measuring 253 bighas and 15 biswas had by means of a notification been included in the reserved forest. It could not, however, be said with any amount of certainty that the land which had been freshly ploughed by the present applicant was part of plot No. 6, measuring 253 bighas 15 biswas in area. The learn...
Om Prakash Sharma Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ865
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. Applicant stood surety for one Achal Singh who was being prosecuted for an offences Under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Achal Singh did not appear in spite of issue of processes. Applicant was then directed to produce the accused on 2-11-19(8 or to show cause why the action should not be taken against him. Notice was served on the applicant on 27-10.1968 personally. He, however, failed to show cause although several dates were fixed for the purpose. The Magistrate therefore, forfeited his bond and directed for the realisation of Rs. 1U00 as penalty for the forfeiture.2. Applicant came up in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge but it was dismissed.3. The learned Counsel for the applicant has argued that the bond executed before the Food Inspector could not be forfeited by the court. Reliance was placed on the case of Kameshwar Bhartia v. State of Assam : 1953CriLJ163 .4. Bhartia's case (A.I.R. 1052 SO 405) is distinguishable on ...
Smt. Sarbati Devi Vs. Sri Ramprasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All321
Gupta, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit of the nature contemplated by Rule 63 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The defence raised included a plea of limitation. The trial Court negatived this plea and, having recorded its findings in plaintiffs favour on the other questions in controversy, decreed the suit. On appeal by the defendant the decree of the trial Court was ultimately set aside on the view that the suit was barred by limitation. The plaintiff then filed this second appeal. It was heard by brother S. N. Singh and on the 28th March 1970, he passed an order referring it for decision by a Division Bench on the ground that the State of authorities bearing on the question of limitation was such that the case deserved hearing by a larger Bench.3. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant at length we have unhesitatingly arrived at the conclusion that the view taken by the appellate court is perfectly correct and this appeal must fail...
Ram Sahai (Died) and After Him Smt. Dhanwati Devi and ors. Vs. Khudaba ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All417
K.B. Asthana, J. 1. This is a defendant-tenant's appeal from a decree of his eviction from a piece of land. Admittedly, the land in dispute on which the defendant-tenant operated his oven, was below the parapet of a mosque and formed a part of the waqf property managed by the plaintiff Mutwalli. The defendant had taken a shop below the parapet of the mosque on rent from the Mutwalli of the mosque by an earlier executed rent note. On the south side of his shop there was an open piece of land in the form of a Kutcha platform10' or 11' high from the road level and extended upto the western parapet wall of the mosque. The defendant-tenant lay a separate rent note took this Chabutra on rent for the purpose of keeping an oven. The defendant-tenant fell in arrears and defaulted in payment of rent of the land. The Mutwalli of the mosque then sent a composite notice demanding arrears for four months, asking the defendant-tenant to pay the same within one month of the receipt of the notice and t...
Shesh NaraIn Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1364
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. One Harihar Dutt Tiwari was charged for having committed forgery in court's records and applicant Shesh Narain and his wife Smt. Rajeshwari Devi were charged for having abetted the commission of the aforesaid forgeries. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted Harihar Dutt Tiwari and Smt. Rajeshwari Devi but convicted the applicant for the offences Under Sections 465 and 466 of the Indian Penal Code both read with Section 109, IPC and sentenced him to one year's rigorous imprisonment and to three years' rigorous imprisonment respectively on those counts. The two sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Jaunpur confirmed the conviction and sentences of the applicant; hence this revision.3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:One Sheomurat had obtained a money decree against the applicant. In its execution, certain bhumidhari plots of the applicant were put on sale. Applicant's wife Smt. Rajeshwari Devi purchased...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›