Andhra Pradesh Court December 1959 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.
In Re: Sri Ram Shastry
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP375; 1960CriLJ889
ORDERSanjeeva Row Naidu, J.1. This Crl. R. C. No. 589 of 1938 is directed against the judgment and order of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hyderabad who confirmed the con-viction and sentence of the petitioner passed by the 2nd City Magistrate, Division No. 1 Hyderabad, who had tried the petitioner under Section 471 I. P. C. and found him guilty. The sentence passed was one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-. 2. Mr. Sarma the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the offence in this case viz., of using a forced document as genuine was, even according to the prosecution, committed some time before 23-1-1949, a fact which is not disputed. He contended that on that date, the Indian Penal Code was not in force in the Hyderabad State and instead the Hyderabad Penal Code was in force.3. He further points out that Section 6 of the Part B States (Laws) Act (III of 1951) clearly lays down that the extension of the I. P. C., the Cr. P. C., and other enactments to the Hyd...
Narasimham (V.L.) Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1959
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ470AP
P. Chandra Reddi, C.J.1. The petitioner who seeks the removal of the order of dismissal by the Government on certiorari, was an antismuggling deputy tahslldar, Naidupet, Nellore district, from 11 January 1952 to 3 June 1953.2. At about 3 a.m. on 2 March 1952, the petitioner found some carts carrying paddy and rice without permit, while he was on duty, on the outskirts of Palicherlapad village of Rapur taluk. It is stated that the petitioner detected this illicit transport of rice and faddy in three carts by four persons including P.W. 1 and Ramaaubba Raddi, which was an offence punishable under the Food Grains Control Order. It appears that he searched the person of Ramaaubba Reddi, seized a sum of Rs. 500 from him and retained that sum with him as illegal gratification for not taking further action against those individuals. In accordance with this understanding he did not take any steps to bring the offenders to book. When this was brought to the notice of the authorities concerned, ...
In Re: Rayala Rama Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1959
Reported in: AIR1961AP66; 1961CriLJ216
ORDERSanjeeva Row Nayudu, J. 1. The petitioner in both the oases is one Rayala Ramarao, who was prosecuted under the provisions to be noticed below of the Motor Vehicles Act. There were originally three prosecutions against him and the cases are numbered as C.C. Nos. 903, 004 and 905 of 1958 on the file of the 1st Addl. Judicial IInd Class Magistrate, Elluru. C.C. No. 903 of 1958 ended in an acquittal and it does not require consideration. 2. In C.C. No. 904 of 1958, the prosecution was laid under Section 38(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (Act IV of 1939), the ground of complaint being that the vehicle did not have fitness certificate as retired by the section. The relevant Section 38(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act reacTs as follows: 'Subject to the provisions of Section 38, a transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purposes of Section 22, unless it carries a certificate of fitness in Form H as set forth in the First Schedule issued by the prescribed authorit...
Subbiah Choudary (B.) Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, [Secretary, Home (P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1959
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ464AP
ORDERP. Chandra Reddi, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing an order of the Government compulsorily retiring the petitioner, who, at the relevant time, was an inspector of police.2. The delinquent officer was a circle inspector of police from 11 September 1953 to 16 December 1954 at Nuzvid. While there, there were some charges against him of having received illegal gratification in connexion with a case of arson against some individuals. It appears that a panchayat board office was set fire to on 15 December 1953. In connexion with this crime, twelve persons were taken into custody by the head constable of Tiruvur police station, three of them, viz.,(i) Ramisetti China Lakshmayya, (ii) Ramleetti Narasayya, and (iii) Katigala Galayya,were put under arrest and kept on remand. Four witnesses were examined by the concerned magistrate, under Section 164, Criminal Procedure Code. Thereafter, the sub-inspector in charge of the station, who was examined as...
Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Muttiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1959
Reported in: AIR1961AP79
Manohar Pershad, J. 1. This is an appeal on behalf of the State against the acquittal of the accused. In such appeals, this court does not usually interfere with the order of acquittal unless there are compelling and substantial reasons; but the learned Public Prosecutor contended that the learned Sessions Judge has erred in holding that the failure on the part of the prosecution to produce all the eye-witnesses for examination before the committing Magistrate's court was fatal as such, it is urged, that his conclusion that the accused are entitled to an acquittal is not justified.2. The facts leading to this appeal are:On 22nd July 1958, when A-1 returned to his house in the evening, he found the door closed from inside. He called out the deceased, who was his daughter-in-law. She came out and went away saying that she would go to the pond to wash clothes. After entering the hut, he found P. W. 1 concealing himself in a big earthen pot. A-1 caught hold of his hair and pulled him out a...
Devathi Subbarayudu and ors. Vs. Puvvadi Chinna Venkatasubbiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP592
Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of our learned brother Srinivasachari, J., dated 6-12-1957 in S. A. No. 310 of 1955, on leave grantedby the learned Judge under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 2. The facts out of which this appeal has arisen may be briefly stated : 3. The appellants before us brought O. S. 74 of 1949 in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Cuddapah, foe setting aside the order dated 4-5-1949 made in E. A. No. 366 of 1948 in O. S. No. 235 of 1943 on the file of the District Munsiff's Court, Nandalur, and for re-delivery of possession of the suit properties to the appellants-plaintiffs, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs. The suit property consists of the northern portion of a terraced house in the town of Badvel in Cuddapah District. The 2nd plaintiff is the mother of the 1st plaintiff. The latter as minor represented by his guardian, the 2nd plaintiff filed O. S. No. 396 of 1931 in the District Munsif's Court, Mandalur, on a pro...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Muttiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1959
Reported in: 1961CriLJ219
Manohar Pershad, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the State against the acquittal of the accused. In such appeals, this Court does not usually interfere with the order of acquittal unless there are compelling and substantial reasons; but the learned Public Prosecutor contended that the learned Sessions Judge has erred in holding that the failure on the part of the prosecution to produce all the eye-witnesses for examination before the committing Magistrate's court was fatal as such, it is urged, that his conclusion that the accused are entitled to an acquittal is not justified.2. The facts leading to this appeal are:On 22nd July 1958, when A-l returned to his house in the evening, he found the door closed from inside. He called out the deceased, who was his daughter-in-law. She came out and went away saying that she would go to the pond to wash clothes. After entering the hut, he found P.W. 1 concealing himself in a big earthen pot. A-1 caught hold of his hair and pulled him out and...
Sreedharaiah and anr. Vs. Dist. Supdt. of Police, Anantapur and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP473; (1960)IILLJ156AP; (1960)IILLJ156AP
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. These petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can be disposed of in a common judgment as they arise out of the same facts and raise the same points for determination.2. The petitioner in W. P. No. 127 of 1957, is Sreedharaiah, who was P. C. 31 of Anantapur District. The petitioner in W. P. No. 153 of 195T is Venkataramanappa who was P. C. 75 of the same District.3. In order to appreciate the points debated before us, it is necessary to set out the admitted facts in their chronological sequence. The two petitioners were in service as police constables in the State of Andhra. In October. 1954, they were attached to the Police Station at Kadiri in Anantapur District. While so, a complaint of irregular and improper conduct in the discharge of their duties was made against them. Having decided to set in motion the machinery preliminary for punishment, the District Superintendent of Police, Anantapur, placed the petitioners under suspension and fra...
Mohan Rao (M.) Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1959
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ165AP
ORDERSatyanarayan Raju, J.1. This is a petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the orders of the state of Andhra Pradesh and the regional transport department removing the petitioner from service. The material facts are these.2. The petitioner joined service as a conductor in the road transport department of the erstwhile Hyderabad State on 18 July 1953. About a year later he was confirmed in the post. On 15 March 1956 two travelling ticket inspectors made a check of the vehicle and found that the petitioner failed to collect the fare from one passenger and omitted to issue tickets to three passengers. They also observed that he issued four torn tickets to passengers on citing them (travelling ticket inspectors). The statements of the passengers were recorded by one of the travelling inspectors and they were attested by the petitioner.3. The conductor is listed as a member of the subordinate services and the authority com...
K. Veeraswamy Deceased by L.R.K.B. Narasappa, Receiver to the Estate o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP422
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. This is an application by the assessee under Section 66'3) of the Income Tax Act questioning the correctness of the order of the Appellate Tribunal rejecting an application under Section 66(11 of the Act, on the ground that it was barred by limitation.2. The order of the Tribunal is the appeal is dated 11th January 1958 and it was received by the assessee on the 31st January 1958. An Advocate of this Court filed an application before the Tribunal for rectification of the order on the ground that it contained some mistake. He sought the rectification in his favour but eventually on the llth March 1958 a rectification was made by the Tribunal which was in fact against the assessee. Thereafter on the 31st March 1958 an application was presented on behalf of the assessee requiring the Tribunal to refer to the High Court certain questions of law as arising out of the order.This abdication was not signed by the asses-see but was signed by the Advocate who filed Vakal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »