Gujarat Court January 1952 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.
State Vs. Talshi Sadul
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ105
Baxi, J.1. The Government have preferred this appeal against the order of the First Class Magistrate, Surendranagar, acquitting the respondent of the offence of consuming an intoxicant (spirit) tinder Section 66(b) of the Prohibition Act. The facts of the case are very simple. Raghuvirsinh, the Homeguard Officer, received1 information on 5.10.50 that one Bai Takhu kept and sold liquor in her house. Thereupon Raghuvirsinh took with him other members of the Home-guard and the Sub-Inspector in order to raid the house. The house was closed but four or five persons came out of an adjoining house in a. drunken condition. One Ramji also passed by with a bottle of spirit in his hand and he and all these persons were arrested by the raiding party. The party then proceeded to the respondent's house where he was found in a drunken condition. A bottle of spirit was found from his house and he was also arrested.All the arrested persons were taken in the chowk where a panchnama of their condition wa...
State Vs. Bai Narmada Shivshanker
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ881
Baxi, J.1. This reference has been made by the Sessions Judge, Central Saurashtra, recommending that the order of the First Class Magistrate, Rajkot (Mr. Upadhyay) convicting and sentencing the opponent under Sections 447 and 426, I.P.C. be set aside.2. The case was tried summarily. The trial commenced before Mr. Garni but before he could complete it he was transferred. Mr. Upadhyay who succeeded him completed the trial. Mr. Garni had examined some of the prosecution witnesses and Mr. Upadhyay acted on Mr. Gami's notes of evidence as also on the notes made by him and convicted the opponent. It appears from the judgment of the learned Magistrate that the complainant and the opponent own adjoining houses. The complainant's roof was higher than the opponent and projected its eaves over it. The opponent raised her roof and the learned Magistrate found that she employed workmen to do the job under the supervision of her maternal uncle. The learned Magistrate further held that in the process...
Gohel Umedsing Narubha and ors. Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-19-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ503
Shah, C.J.1. These are eleven petitions for a writ of habeas corpus involving common questions of law. Of course the petitioners in petitions Nos. 1, 2, 10, 11, and 12 of 1952 were arrested and detained on 27th March 1951 by an order of the District Magistrate, Central Saurashtra District, dated 25th March 1951. The petitioner in petition No. 7 of 1952 was arrested and detained on 26th March 1951 by a similar order of the said District Magistrate, and in the case of the above six petitioners the Advisory Board has submitted a report under Section 10(1) of the Preventive Detention Act on 1st August 1951.2. The petitioner in petition No. 3 of 1952 was arrested on 12th April 1951 by an order of the District Magistrate Central Saurashtra District, dated 11th April 1951. The petitioner in petition No, 81 of 1951 was arrested and detained by an order of the District Magistrate, Gohilwad District, dated 17th April 1951. The petitioner in petition No. 6 of 1952 was arrested and detained on 18t...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›