Andhra Pradesh Court September 1951 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.
Rama Ambaji Vs. the State of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1951
Reported in: 1953CriLJ1851
Palnitkar, J.1. The facts briefly stated against the accused are that on the morning of 3.8.1950 Harna Bai, the mother of the accused went to the house of the deceased and demanded payment of money due to her. It is said that the house of Harna Bai was very near to the house of the deceased and that Harna Bai had advanced an amount of Rs. 150/- to the deceased out of which some money was due. This occurrence is said to have taken place in Deshrnulm Galli. It is said that the deceased Ibrahim denied that any balance was due but Harna Bai insisted that some balance was due and that it should be paid forthwith otherwise she would take away household utensils of the deceased. On this, the deceased it is said asked Harna Bai to hold the tail of the cow and say that money was still due. At this, it is said that the accused Rama who is the son of Harna Bai and who was nearby caught hold of a cow that was passing by and brought it near Harna Bai and Harna Bai caught hold of the tail of the cow...
Yakub Sab Vs. the State of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1951
Reported in: 1952CriLJ347
ORDERShripatrao, J.1. This is a report by the District Magistrate at Raichur recommending that the case be sent for 'de novo' trial to the Magistrate's Court at Manvi.2. Mr. Appa Rao, the learned Advocate for the accused party Yakub Sab has appeared before mo and requested that the case be treated as a revision petition against the order of conviction.3. So far as the question of 'de novo' trial is concerned, I do not agree with the recommendations of the District Magistrate. The ground on which the said District Magistrate has recommended 'de novo' trial is that according to his view. Section 248 Criminal P.C. does not warrant summarry trial of cases under the Hyderabad Gaming Act. Mr. Trimbak Rao, the learned Public Prosecutor has rightly pointed out that the aforesaid interpretation of Section 248 put by the District Magistrate is not correct. The said Section has been amended in 1356 F. long before the report under consideration, was made. Under the amendment, First Class Magistrat...
Gajar Chinna Hanumiha Vs. State of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-1951
Reported in: 1952CriLJ152
1. This is an application in revision by the accused in case in which he stands charged with having contravened the provisions of Section 3, Hyderabad Cinematograph Act (VIII of 1348 F.) hereinafter referred to as the Act. The accused before the commencement of the trial raised a preliminary objection that the learned Magistrate of Jogipet had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the charge inasmuch as the only authority mentioned in S.C of the Act was the licensing authority and the licensing authority in Section 4 of the Act is mentioned to be the Taluqdar (Collector of the District.) Therefore the Taluqdar will be deemed to be the person who can lawfully impose the fine as provided in Section 6 of the Act in case the contravention of provision of Section 3 be held as proved. This argument did not find favour with the learned Magistrate. Consequently he overruled the objection and ordered the trial to proceed.2. In this revision the same argument has been repeated before us, in our ...
Tippa Reddy Vs. Gondamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-1951
Reported in: 1952CriLJ567
ORDERShripatrao, J.1. This is a revision petition against the order of the Munsiff at Chincholi, dated 4.7.1951.2. The facts necessary in the revision are that Gondamma, respondent before me filed a petition in the lower Court stating that there was a dispute between the parties under Section 148H Criminal P.C. corresponding to Section 145, Criminal P.C., which was decided on 24th Isfandar 1350 F. (1941 AD) on the basis of a compromise; that as mentioned in the compromise the case was decided by the criminal Court on the said date and that subsequently she got possession of survey number 163. She alleges that she was in possession and enjoyment of that survey number for some time, that) during the Police Action (which took place in 1948) the opposite party Tippa Reddy dispossessed her and that therefore she should be given possession. The present petitioner contested the petition on the ground that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. The lower Court came to th...
Abdul Munim Khan Vs. the State of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1951
Reported in: 1953CriLJ785
Srinivasachari, J.1. Criminal Appeal from the judgment and order of the Court of the Special Tribunal IV, Trimulgherry, dated 11.9.1950 in Cr. Case No. 1 of 1358 Fasli on the file of that Court, and on a refrence made by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated 13.4.1951, there being a difference of opinion between the Hon'ble Judges constituting the Devision Bench.This case has assumed much more importance than the general class of cases of murder which we come across every-day because of the political background behind it and because there was implicated in it the most powerful figure in Hyderabad during the period prior to the Police Action.2. The motive alleged for the crime by the prosecution is that one Shoebullah Khan who was editing a daily Newspaper called 'Imroze' was repeatedly publishing articles against the policy of Syed Mohamad Khasim Razvi, the leader and President of the Itehad-ul-Muslim, which was the most powerful organization exercising enormous control over the administ...
Abaji and ors. Vs. Hyderabad State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-1951
Reported in: 1952CriLJ572
Ahmed Mohiuddin Ansari, J.1. Narayan, Balaji and five others were challaned for the murder of Kondaji under Section 243, Hyderabad Penal Code corresponding to Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and were committed to the Aurangabad Sessions Court which after a trial acquitted Bhikaji accused No. 6 and convicted the remaining six accused under Section 244, Hyderabad Penal Code, that is, culpable homicide not amounting to murder and awarded five years' rigorous imprisonment to accused No. 7, and ten years' rigorous imprisonment to the remaining accused under Section 244, Hyderabad Penal Code, and a further term of two ' years' rigorous imprisonment for causing grievous hurt to Limbaji; and six months' each for causing simple hurt to Dathu.2. Under the Hyderabad Criminal Procedure Code, this sentence did not require confirmation by the High Court inasmuch as the sentences were to run concurrently and no sentence is above that of ten years rigorous imprisonment. So, we are not hearing th...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›