Gujarat Court June 1960 Judgments
Ambalal Motibhai Patel Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj1; 1961CriLJ50; (1960)GLR113
Raju, J. 1. This is Criminaa l Appeal by one Ambalal Moti-bhai Patel who in Special Case No. 8 of 1960 was convicted by the Special Judge of Kaira at Nadiad under section 161 I. P. C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.2. Although the circumstance of the finding of the notes with bribe-taker is absent in this case, the prosecution wants to rely on the finding of the anthracene powder on the fingers of the left hand of the accused immediately after the alleged bribe was taken. It is the evidence of all the witnesses-Ran-chhodbhai, Panch Ghanashyam, Panch Motibhai, Head Constable Bharatsing and P. S. I. Jadeja that when they entered the room of the accused, they asked the accused to stretch out his hand and marks of white powder were seen on all the fingers of the left hand of the accused. The evidence regarding the anthracene powder has been strongly commented upon by. Mr. Ghaswalta. His criticism is that marks of powder could not be seen even under the light of the ul...
Tag this Judgment!Malik Vaghji Bawaji and anr. Vs. Patel Makan Hirji and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-29-1960
Reported in: (1960)1GLR18
S.T. Desai, C.J.1. A question of some importance has been raised before us on this petition and the question relates to the connotation and the ambit of the expression tenant in the Saurashtra Barkhali Abolition Act 1959. That Act it may be mentioned was enacted principally to abolish barkhali tenure prevailing in certain parts of Saurashtra. It appears from the provisions of the Act that it brought about certain agrarian reforms and improvement in the land revenue administration. It is necessary to examine the scope of the Act in so far as it is helpful in understanding the principal question which arises for our determination.2. But of this more hereafter. The petitioners are barkhalidars within the meaning of Section 2(i) of the Barkhali Abolition Act of 1951 and one of their fields Hamirki admeasuring four acres was mortgaged with possession to one Lallu Bechar. Two other fields admeasuring 6 acres and 16 gunthas belonging to the barkhalidars were also mortgaged with possession. It...
Tag this Judgment!Kanbi Kurji Duba Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Guj1; 1960CriLJ1200
(1) At the material time, the accused, house wife, the accused Jamuna and his two sons, the elder being Anther, were living in the village Bhandarda in the District of Sorath. They had come from Papilla to this villages only two or three months prior to the dates of the incident. The accessed had purchased a few months prior to the date of the incident certain fee lands which were situates about half a lie away from the village Bhandarada. On the 11th of May 1959, that being the Ganesh Chaturthi, the accused, the deceasesds Jamuna and their two sons went to a the place called 'Dhukhan' apparently to bring some earth from there. They had gone in apart belonging to the accused and there was a crow bar with them when they went to the place. At about 9 a.m., the accused returned to the villages accompanied, how-ever, only by his younger son about three years of age. While he was passing by the house of the AR Panache of the village, witness Bhaishanker Pranjivan, the accessed called out to...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Chaturi and ors. Vs. States
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Guj5
Raju, J.(1) Before we deal with the evidence, it would be desirable to state what the prosecution has to prove in a charge under S. 401, I.P.C., which reads as under:'Whoever, at any time after the passing of this Act, shall' belong to any wandering or other gang of persons associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery, and not being a gang of Thugs or dacoits, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.'As the section clearly mentions, the prosecution has to proves that the accused persons charged under S. 401 belongs to a gang of persons and that the gang of persons is associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery. The word 'belong' implies something more than casual association; it involves the notion of continuity and requires the proof of a more or less intimate connection with a body of persons extending over a period of time sufficiently long to warrant th...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Chaturi W/O Andheribhai and ors. Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1960
Reported in: 1960CriLJ1204
V.B. Raju, J.1. Before we deal with the evidence, it would he desirable to state what the prosecution has to prove in a charge under S, 401, IPC which leads as under:Whoever, at any time after the passing of this Act, shall belong to any wandering or other gang of persons associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery, and not being a gang of Thugs or dacoits, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.As the Section clearly mentions, the prosecution has to prove that the accused person charged Under Section 401 belongs to a gang of persons and that the gang of persons is associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery. The word 'belong' implies something more than casual association; it involves the notion of continuity and requires the proof of a more Or less intimate connection with a body of persons extending over a period of time sufficiently long to warrant th...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Prembai Zaver and ors. Vs. Koli Tapur Ratna
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1960
Reported in: (1960)1GLR5
S.T. Desai, C.J.1. This Special Civil Application and the second Appeal which are directed to be heard together arise in circumstances to be immediately stated. The petitioners in Special Civil Application are the appellants in the Second Appeal and they are occupants of agricultural lands admeasuring acres 65 and 10 gunthas situated in the village Kantasar. The lands were leased out by them to opponent No. 1 to the Special Civil Application Koli Tapur Ratna under a lease for a period of eight years. About a month before the due date for the expiry of the lease the petitioners gave a notice to opponent No. 1 calling upon him to land over possession of the lands on the expiry of the lease by efflux of time. The lease expired on 8th December 1953. Opponent No. 1 refused to hand over possession of the lands and the petitioners filed a suit for eviction in the Court of the Civil Judge at Mahuva. Various contentions were raised in that suit by opponent No. 1. He contended that he had been i...
Tag this Judgment!Pa, Ganda Kala and ors. Vs. the Bombay State (Revenue Dept.) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-20-1960
Reported in: (1960)1GLR45
S.T. Desai, C.J.1. The principal question that arises on this petition lies in a narrow compass and relates to the construction of Section 44(3) of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act 951 (No. XXV of 1951) That Act as is clear from its various provisions was enacted primarily for the purpose of putting an end to the Girasdari system and to regulate the relationship between the Girasdar and their tenants to enable the latter to become occupants of the land held by them and to provide for the payment of compensation to the Girasdars for the extinguishment of their rights. Petitioners who are 73 in number cultivated lands situated in Charkha in the Babra Taluka Madhya Saurashtra District of the State of Bombay. They were grantees from talukdars of what are knows as Chav Hak rights which put them in a status higher than that of an ordinary tenant. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are Girasdars of the lands cultivated by the petitioners within the meaning of the expression Girasdar in Section 2(15) of ...
Tag this Judgment!Parmar Gogji Kana Vs. Parmar Ganesh Moti
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1968Guj287; (1968)0GLR1060
(1) The suit from which this second appeal arises was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent in the Court of the Civil Judge (J. D) at Limbdi against the defendant-appellant for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from tethering cattle in his Pali and keeping utensils and agricultural implements and also for a and agricultural implements and also for a permanent injunction restraining him from causing obstruction to him in tethering cattle or using the Pali in any way he liked and for other incidental reliefs in the suit, inter alia alleging that the suit Pali belongs to him and that the defendant has no right to tether cattle or keep any such implements so as to obstruct him in enjoyment thereof. (2) The defendant-appellant resisted the suit inter alia contending that the Pail in front of his house belongs to him and not to the plaintiff as alleged: that he had allowed the plaintiff to construct a Gaman as he was his neighbor and he has to remove the same when called upon...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Rasul Khan Chandkhan
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj4; 1961CriLJ54
ORDERRaju, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge of Kaira recommending that the order passed by the First Class Magistrate, Nadiad, rejecting the application by the prosecution for the return of the Muddamal Liquor to the Police for being sent to the Chemical Analyser. The prosecution filed an application before the learned Magistrate for the return of the Muddamal liquor to the police in order to enable the police to send the Muddamal to the Chemical Analyser, as the prosecution had only relied on the hydrometer test but in view of the recent ruling of the Bombay High Court it is necessary to get the liquor examined by the Chemical Analyser. The Magistrate was of the view that once the prosecution submitted a chargesheet it is to be considered that the police investigation has been completed. The police cannot resume the investigation. He therefore thought that the request of the prosecution was not supported by any provision of law and he rejected the application....
Tag this Judgment!Jay Gujarat Prakshan Ltd. Vs. Hariprasad Harigovindas Pandya and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Guj10; (1960)GLR10
Desai, C.J.(1) Petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 are directors of petitioner No. 1 company and partners in the firms of petitioners Nos. 2 and 3. They were concerned with the publication of the daily newspaper 'Jan Tantra', which we are informed is now defunct. For convenience and brevity we shall refer to them collectively. Respondent No. 1 who is a journalist filed an application for the recovery of Rs. 2, 726/- from the petitioners under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act before respondent No. 2, who is the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, to be referred to by us as the Authority.The case of respondent No. 1 before the Authority was that the was he employed as an Editor of the daily newspaper 'Jan Tantra' from 1st June 1958 on a monthly salary of Rs. 175/- or the wages to be fixed by the Wages Board appointed by the Government of India, whichever was higher. It was also his case before the Authority that he was employed to do work in various other capacities, viz., that of the r...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »