Guwahati Court April 1953 Judgments
Haren Kalita Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-29-1953
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner, who claims to be working for the upliftment of the workers and peasants of Assam, has moved against an order of internment, dated 11-8-52, passed by the Governor of Assam, purporting to have been made by him in the exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of Sub-section (1) of Section 2 read with Sub-section (4) of that section of the Assam Maintenance of Public order Act, 1947 (Act 5 of 1947) as amended. This order was subsequently confinned by the Governor on 23-10-1952, after a consideration of the report of the Advisory Council. 2. The petitioner has moved for a Writ to quash the orders in question and a Rule nisi was issued by this Court on 23-2-53. The matter has, therefore, been heard in the presence of the opposite party, the State of Assam which has shown cause against the Rule. 3. The petitioner alleges that on 8-11-50 he was arrested under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Labanya Chandra and anr. Vs. the State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-28-1953
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. The petitioner in Civil Rule No. 102 of 1952 has applied for writs in the nature of Mandamus and/or Certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is directed against an order issued to him by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Cachar on 13-5-1952.2. The facts leading to that order as alleged are as follows: The petitioner is the owner of vehicle No. ASC. 848 and holds a Public Carrier Permit for it. On 18-3-1952 he was going on his vehicle to Silchar in order to have the truck repaired. On the way the District Transport Officer, Opposite Party 3 who is also the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority was seen going in the same direction. He signalled the petitioner to stop his vehicle. It was stopped forthwith. The petitioner came to the District Transport Officer who at once started calling him names and using abusive and filthy language in the presence of several persons. He then ordered one of his office assistants to seize the...
Tag this Judgment!Jahur Mia Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-27-1953
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J.1. I was reluctant to Interfere with the order of sentence and conviction passed in the present case. The petitioner has been convicted under Sections 279 and 304A, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- or in default, another period of six months under the latter section, but there was no separate sentence given under the former. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge has confirmed the order of sentence and conviction passed against him, I find, however, that in the circumstances of this case it is difficult to sustain the conviction under Section 304A, Indian Penal Code.2. It has been repeatedly held that in order to impose criminal liability under Section 304A of the Code, it is essential to prove that death must have been the direct result of the rash arid negligent act of the accused. The act of the accused must be the approximate and the efficient cause without the intervention of any other circumstance. ...
Tag this Judgment!Manipur State Vs. Naosekpam Nimai Singh and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-25-1953
Lakshmi Narain, J.C.1. The two accused Naosekpam Nimai Singh aged 21 years and Sagolsem Ibotombi Singh aged 18 years, have been committed for trial under Section 302, I. P. C. for committing murder of one Bokul Singh of their Basti on the night between 2/3 July 1952. They have pleaded not guilty to the charge and have produced no defence.2. The prosecution suggests that there were ill-feelings between the deceased and some villagers including Paonam Kanhai Singh Nambor, on account of some new settlement of land and its cultivation by the deceased and that Kanhai Singh engaged the two accused for committing murder of Bokul Singh by promising to give them Rs. 300/-. It is said that he also provided the accused with two sticks and some clothes to put on that night. While the deceased was sleeping in the verandah of Gopal Singh P. W. along with his step sou Budha Singh, they attacked them with sticks. The boy Budha Singh fled away. Bokul Singh got some 6 injuries - 4 contused wounds and ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Mohan Saha and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-16-1953
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J. CIVIL REVISION NO. 119 OF 1952 1. The petitioner in this case instituted Money Suit No. 50 of 1949 in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge at Dhubri for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,210/8/-as compensation for loss on account of certain goods booked at Amingaon Railway Station. The Union of India was made, a party defendant to the suit as the owner of tha Assam Railway to which the goods were consigned. 2. The plaintiff's case was that one, Haripada Saha, an employee of the plaintiff who is also a party defendant to the suit, had purchased 125 pairs of 'saris' and 11 pairs of 'dhotis' on behalf of the plaintiff from a Marwar firm at Gauhati for a sum of Rs. 2,073/-. He packed the cloth in gunny bags and booked them at the Amingaoa Railway Station, as per Bill of Lading, Ex. 1. The goods were kept in charge of the Guard of tha train concerned and they were to be delivered to the petitioner at Sapat-gram, but no delivery was made. Thereafter the petitioner se...
Tag this Judgment!Muksud Ali Vs. Sajan Ali
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-16-1953
Lakshmi Narain, J.C.1. The case referred to is on a private complaint. It is alleged that on 4.2.50 the accused entered wrongfully into the paddy field measuring about 5 gandas of the complainant and trampled the young grown paddy under their feet thus causing damage to the extent of Rs. 50/60 to him. When the complainant resisted he was attacked and chased upto his house.2. As the case apparently falls under Sections 426 & 447, Penal Code, the learned Magistrate tried It as a summons case and convicted and sentenced on 22.12.51 all the accused under the above sections to a fine of Rs. 30/- each or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.3. On motion by the accused, the Sessions Judge, Tripura has recommended this case under Section 438, Criminal P.C. to this Court for ordering fresh trial under proper procedure after setting aside the conviction and sentence on the ground that as the amount of damage caused is mentioned by the complainant at Rs. 50/60 the offence fa...
Tag this Judgment!Pran Gobinda Roy Vs. Birendra Ch. Roy
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-09-1953
Lakshmi Narain, J.C.1. The two accused petitioners in the present case were charged by Shri B.B. Dutta, Magistrate 1st Classes Udaipur under Sections 448/380, I.P.C. on 11.5.51 on a charge sheet submitted by the Police. They pleaded not guilty to the charge and wished to further cross-examine the complainant and other prosecution witnesses in the case. The Magistrate adjourned the case for further hearing on 26.5.51 and ordered the prosecuting Sub-Inspector to produce the above P.Ws. for the purpose.2. On that date, only the complainant and one P.W. was present. The accused persons objected to cross-examine them in part. The prosecuting Sub-Inspector also; applied for permission to produce the remaining P.Ws. on the next date of hearing. The case was adjourned to 15.6.51. The same process happened on the next 2/3 hearings. On 24.7.51 the complainant with 4 P.Ws. was present. The prosecution promised to produce the remaining 4 P.Ws. on a subsequent hearing. The accused petitioned that ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›