Guwahati Court March 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.
Abdul Gafur Vs. Govt. of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-30-1951
Sen Gupta, C.J.1. This is an application for a certificate under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India that the applicant's case was a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The petitioner was convicted on a charge under Section 302, I.P.C. by the Sessions Judge of Agartala, agreeing with the opinion of two of the three Assessors who aided him in the trial, sentencing him to transportation for life. The petitioner appealed against his conviction and the appeal was dismissed and on revision by this Court, in exercise of the powers under Section 439, Criminal P.C. the sentence was enhanced to one of death. The present petition is aimed against the dismissal of the appeal as well as the enhancement of the sentence.3. The grounds on which the certificate is prayed for are practically the following:1. That this Court was wrong in admitting in evidence under Section 428, Criminal P.C. the statement of the petitioner which was not tendered, under Section 287, Criminal P.C. by th...
Govt. of Tripura Vs. Abdul Gofur
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-20-1951
Sen Gupta, J.C.1. This Rule was issued upon the Opposite Party to show cause why the sentence of his transportation for life passed by the Sessions Judge of Agartala under Section 302, Penal Code, in Sessions case No. 17 of 1950, should not be enhanced to one of death.2. The matter came to the notice of this Court on an appeal being filed by the opposite party against his conviction and sentence and the rule was issued during the pendency of the appeal. The appeal having been dismissed, the rule was heard after further notice to the opposite party and the State. The opposite party was represented by an Advocate of this Court, who had also conducted the appeal on his behalf. The State Advocate appeared to support the rule.3. Grounds put forward by the opposite party were, (1) that he was innocent. (2) that he was only 22 years of age and (3) that his family would be in distress if the sentence against him is executed. This cause was shown before the disposal of the appeal. The opposite...
Dharmeswar Kalita Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-16-1951
Ram Labhaya, J.1. The petitioner, Dharmeswar Kalita, was summoned on a complaint from Jubaraj Medhi, Inspector of Police, Special Police-Establishment, Government of India, Shillong. The complaint was under Section 420 read with Sections 511 and 471, Penal Code. A co-accused of the petitioner was Jogendranath Chakravarty. The petitioner applied to the Court for the stay of the proceedings on the complaint. He also objected to the competency of the proceedings on the ground that the complainant had no authority to institute the complaint. His prayer for stay was refused and his objection was disallowed. Ho has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of thi3 Court with a view to having the proceedings quashed. He bas also prayed, is the alternative, for stay of the proceedings till the disposal of the civil suit instituted by him.2. The case disclosed in the complaint was that the petitioner Dharmeswar Kalita was a Military Contractor during the war period. His co-accused Jogendranath Chakr...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›