Allahabad Court February 1990 Judgments
Kamal Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1721
ORDERG.D. Dubey, J. 1. The above case arises from district which is covered by the Dacoity Affected Area Act, 1986 which shall hereinafter be referred to as Act. In this case an objection has been raised by the learned A.G.A. that as 180 days have not passed after the arrest of the accused-applicant the bail cannot be considered by this High Court. In this respect my attention has been drawn to proviso to Section 10 of the Act. It was also submitted that it is a Special Act and this proviso will apply and the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) will stand excluded.2. The learned counsel for the applicant urged that the provision of Section 10 of the Act only puts some restrictions on the granting of bail in matters of scheduled offences mentioned in the Act. There is no complete blanket on the powers of this Court to grant bail within 180 days of the arrest of the accused persons.3. Sarvasri G. P. Dixit and J. S. Sengar Advocates have ...
Tag this Judgment!Deep Chand JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: (1991)36ITD227(All.)
1. Similar points are involved in these appeals and, as such, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a consolidated order.2. This appeal pertains to the assessment year 1983-84 and is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 22nd August, 1989. The following grounds have been raised in the appeal:- 1. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming and holding the action under Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. 2. Because on a proper consideration of facts and circumstances of the case, there being no 'omission' or 'information' as relevant as essential for reopening of assessment under Section 17, the reassessment proceedings initiated and the assessee framed thereafter is without jurisdiction and bad in law. 3. Because the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred on facts and in law in setting aside the assessment back to the file of the Deputy Commissioner to be refrained as per his suggestions is contrary to facts and b...
Tag this Judgment!Asst. Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt Kamlesh Tandon.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD517(NULL)
ORDERPer Shri O. P. Jain, Judicial Member - The order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) dated 3rd April, 1989 relating to the assessment year 1984-85 is being questioned on the following ground :'1. That the learned Dy. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in directing the assessing officer to allow entire liability of Rs. 42,096 against the assessees wealth including house property for the assessment year under consideration, following the decision of Honble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. M. N. Rajam : [1982]133ITR75(Mad) , which is not applicable to the facts of the present case and he should at best have directed for the allowance of the debt on proportionate basis.2. That the order of the learned Dy. CIT (A) being erroneous in law and on facts deserves to be vacated and the order of the WTO deserves to be restored'.2. The assessee, by status an individual, had borrowed funds from M/s Usnakmal Mool Chand and had invested the amount in the construction of a house property. T...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Narendra Pal Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1637
Palok Basu, J.1. This is yet another instance where a callous news item printed in one of the local weekly newspapers has resulted in publicly undermining the prestige of a court of law.2. Narendra Pal Singh Chauhan is proprietor, Editor and publisher of local weekly newspaper 'Hamraj Express' published from Saharanpur. Sooraj Prakash is printer and proprietor of M/s. Kiran Printers, Berry Bagh, Saharanpur.3. In the issue of Hamraj Express dated 3-8-85, scandalous allegations about the then Second Additional District and Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, appeared. The news item, translated into English, would read like this :'The Additional District and Sessions Judge Sri XXX (name omitted by us) is sliding on the path of corruption :(1) Law is sold there.(2) Law is torn into pieces there.(3) Law is always shelved there.The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sri XXX has taken lacs of rupees as bribe and has thereby undermined the prestige of law:--(i) Sri XXX who presides over the seat ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1381
G.K. Mathur, J.1. This and the connected appeals arises out of the judgment and order dated 28th February, 1978 passed by Sri J.D. Chaturvedi, Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi in Sessions Trial Nos. 193 of 1975 and 111 of 1976, convicting the appellants for the offence punishable Under Section 396 I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that at about 2 a.m. on 23rd of March, 1975 Raj Bali, complainant, who was sleeping in his Marha situate to the east of his house in village Dhananjaipur, P.S. Baragaon district Varanasi, woke up due to barking of dogs and saw six or seven persons, armed with pistols, guns and lathis, coming to his house. They flashed their torches and caught hold of his father Chhama Nand Rai and his cousin brother, Prem Shanker, who were sleeping on the heap of harvested wheat crop kept in between his house and the Marha, Raj Bali raised alarm which attracted Hausla Prasad (P.W. 2), Samarjeet Upad...
Tag this Judgment!Y. N. Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD308(NULL)
ORDERPer Anand Prakash, Accountant Member - This appeal is directed against the order under section 263 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad in respect of assessment year 1983-84.2. The setting of the facts, which led to the action under section 263 and the subsequent order passed therein may be noted :-(i) The assessee is a contractor. In respect of assessment year 1983-84, he filed his return of income on 31-12-1983 showing an income of Rs. 1,12,800. The hearing of the aforesaid case was fixed by the ITO on 30th of January, 1984 after issuing notice under section 143(2). The assessee attended on the said date and the assessment was finalised by the ITO on the aforesaid date itself.The order sheet entry reads as below :-'30-1-84 Sri Y. N. Sharma present. T. D. S. Certificate filed. Discussed.Assessed. Issue D.N & R.V.'The assessment order itself was short and reads, inter alia, as below :-'Return filed showing income of Rs. 1,12,800. In response to notice under sect...
Tag this Judgment!Sriram Bricket Industries Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR392(All)
A.N. Varma, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel for the respondents. The first contention raised by learned counsel was that the retention of the books of account seized by the Department beyond 180 days was manifestly illegal inasmuch as the requisite prior permission for retaining the books of account beyond 180 days as contemplated under Sub-section (8) of Section 132 of the Income-tax Act had not been obtained.2. The contention cannot be accepted as the facts necessary for sustaining that plea have not been asserted in the petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to paragraph 10 of the petition. We have examined paragraph 10 of the petition but do not, find any assertion to the effect that factually the sanction of the Commissioner of Income-tax had not been obtained within 180 days. Indeed, paragraph 10 consists only of legal submissions rather than any positive assertion of fact. On the contrary, par...
Tag this Judgment!Guddu Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1531
ORDERG.D. Dube, J. 1. This is an application for bail.The applicant is said to have been arrested on the spot while picking the pocket of the reporter and relieving him of Rs. 240/- at about 11.30 p.m. on 30-11-1989. It is alleged that the reporter was taking his meal in a marriage party. The applicant was taking meal in that party. Somehow, in the crowd, he had picked the pocket. The Magistrate as well as the Sessions Judge rejected the application for bail. Hence this application has been moved.2. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is a boy below sixteen years of age. He ought to have been granted bail by the lower court.Learned State Counsel urged that pickpockets put the victim in a very strange and helpless position after the occurrence and strong view should be taken.3. As seen above, the offence was quite petty in nature. The learned Sessions Judge was exercising the jurisdiction under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter re...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bilas (In Jail) Vs. Smt. Bhagwati Devi Wife of Ram Bilas and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1098
ORDERRajeshwar Singh, J.1. The Magistrate awarded maintenance to the wife Under Section 125 of the Criminal P.C. to be paid by the husband at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month. The husband did not make payment and the court committed the husband to jail for 14 months as maintenance for 14 months was due. Against that order the husband filed a revision, that was dismissed. But that did not satisfy the husband and instead of paying maintenance to the wife he again spent in litigation and filed this application Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for review or recall of the order dismissing the revision alleging that 'a very obnoxious interpretation has been made' by this Court and the order dismissing the revision was 'utterly smarting under the abuse of judicial process'.2. In the case of State of Orissa v. Ram Chander Agarwala : 1979CriLJ33 the Supreme Court said that once a judgment has been pronounced by a High Court either in exercise of its appellate or its revisional jurisdiction, no review...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Prabha and ors. Vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: 1990ACJ858
N.N. Mithal, J. 1. A claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 having been dismissed, the claimants have filed this appeal.2. The facts which are either admitted or which are not seriously disputed may be stated first with a view to have an exposure of the facts necessary for explaining the setting of the contentions between the parties.3. Hukum Chand, the deceased victim of the accident, was 34 years of age and was a teacher in the Harcourt Higher Secondary School, New Delhi, drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 578/- at the relevant time. The claimants are his widow, two minor sons and a minor daughter, it is now undisputed that Hukum Chand died in a motor accident while he, along with his family, was waiting for a bus in front of Gurukul Sarvodaya Inter College, Panchli Khurd on Meerut-Baghpat Road, about 15 km. west of Meerut. The fact that Vishnu Dutt was the husband of the sister of victim's wife is not under challenge and he was Principal of the Sarvodaya Col...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »