Gujarat Court July 1954 Judgments
Bharwad Vibha Ghora Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-31-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ23
Baxi, J.(1) The appellant has preferred this appeal against his conviction and sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304, Part I, IPC passed by the Sessions Judge, Central Saurashtra.The prosecution alleged that in the afternoon of 23rd February 1953 Santos, Savita and Rav.it, all children between 10 and 12, had gone to the .grazing ground about half a mile from the village of Dungarpar. The accused was there with his cows and a boy named Arjan was also there. He had an axe with him. A cow belonging to Santok strayed into the accused's herd, Santok went there and there was some altercation as a result of which the accused assaulted her. Santos Savita and Ravat then came away and Santot-complained to tier mother that the appellant had committed an indecent assault on her.It is proved that she was assaulted no doubt but her report that the assault was an indecent assault does not appear to be correct. The mother reported the matter to Santok's father the deceased Ja...
Tag this Judgment!Sindhi Nyalchand Kevalram and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ1633
Baxi, J.1. The abovenamed appellants that is, Gan-gadas, Mohanlal and Nyalchand were tried by the Special Judge, Madhya Saurashtra District,, for offences punishable Imder Section 161, I, P, O. Section 5 (2), Prevention of Corruption Act atuf Section 77 (2), District Municipal Act read with Section 114, IPC The appellants Gangdas and Mohanlal accused Nos. 1 and 2, were employed by the Jefpur Municipality as octroi duty collectors or nakadars. The appellant Nyalchand Kevalram, accused No. 3, is a merchant in Jetpur. According to prosecution, on 29-9-52 a cart with 30 tins of vegetable ghee purchased by accused No. 3 from Dhoraji arrived at the Dak bungalow octroi post in Jetpur at about 8-30 or 9 p.m.The accused No. 3 was there since afternoon. The accused No. 2 was on duty at this post and accused No. 1 was false there when the part arrived. The accused No. 3 deposited Rs. 10/- and a tin of ghee at the octroi post and the cart was allowed to go into the city. No receipt was however iss...
Tag this Judgment!Rabari Rana Raja Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ49
Shah, C.J.(1) The question arising for consideration is whether if one an appeal from jail is summarily dismissed Under Section 421(1), Criminal Procedure Code, a fresh appeal filed by the same appellant through a pleader Under Section 419 can be heard.Under Section 421(1), the appellate Court is required to peruse the petition of appeal and the copy of the judgment appealed against and if the Court considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily; but by virtue of the proviso to the subsection an appeal presented Under Section 419 by the appellant or his pleader is not to be dismissed without giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard.By necessary implication therefore an appeal from jail may be dismissed without giving to the appellant an opportunity of hearing, and such dismissal is as final as the dismissal of an appeal filed Under Section 419 after giving a hearing to the appellant or his pleader. Sub-section (1) makes no d...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Kathi Unad Ranning and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-16-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ52
Baxi, J.(1) In this case the point for determination The whether the Court can take cognizance of as offence Under Section 188, IPC without a complaint in writing of the public officer concerned.(2) The Plead Constable of the Jesar Thanm made a report to the Sub-Inspector complaining of obstruction by the respondents in the discharge of his official duty and hurt. After stating the facts in the report he had stated that lie was thereby 'making complaint for proceeding against the respondents according to law.' The In-change Sub-Inspector, who received the report, .'the permanent Sub-Inspector being out of station, investigated into the offence and a charge-sheet to the Magistrate was sent by the Sub-Inspector, to trtwm the case was made over on his return. The learned Magistrate held after a trial that he had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence in the absence of a proper complaint as required, by Section 195(1), Criminal P. C. and acquitted the respondent.(3) The learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Shah Himatlal Amulkh and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-15-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ1399
Baxi, J.1. The applicant Himatlal was the Special Ghar. khed Mamlatdar, Limbdi. It is alleged that he destroyed certain orders and proceedings with the help of the appellant 2, his brother, in two Gharkhed cases Nos. 1916 and 1917 and substituted new orders and proceedings. The original proceedings and orders were not according to law; the applicant Himatlal apprehended a departmental inquiry and caused destruction and substitution of the record with a view to escape detection. In respect of these two cases two charge-sheets were submitted by the police which were registered as criminal cases Nos. 12 and 13 of 1953 in the Court of the First Class Magistrate of Limbdi. The applicants were accused of more than three distinct offences and abetment thereof in respect of these acts. In 8 other Gharkhed cases the applicant Himatlal alone is alleged to have committed similar acts of destruction and substitution of new records with a similar object. In respect of these 8 cases six non-cognizab...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›