Guwahati Court July 1954 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.
Manipur State Vs. Laisram Bokul Singh
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-29-1954
Brij Narain, J.C.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the Manipur State under Section 417, Or. P. C., read with Section 20, Manipur State Courts Act, 1947, against the order of acquittal of the respondent passed by the Sessions Judge, Manipur, in criminal appeal No. 20 of 1954 on 31-3-1954. The respondent was originally convicted by the senior Extra Assistant Commissioner in criminal case No. 675 of 1954 on 8-3-1954 under Section 417 and was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 400/- and in default of payment of fine a further term of 4 months' rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts of the case as alleged by the prosecution are that Waithou Phumnam Fishery was purchased by the Waithou Phumnam Mapan Fishery Co-operative Society Limited during the year 1953 for Rs. 40.000/- and odd and the Patsal (proceeds money) was to be paid in 3 instalments.The first two instalments appeared to have been paid earlier and a sum of Rs. 7,500/- was raised in the village for payment...
Putul Chandra Bora Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-28-1954
Deka, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of Putul Chandra Bora who was convicted Under Section 302, IPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, L. A. D. agreeing with the majority verdict of the jury and sentenced to transportation for life. The jury was divided as five to four.2. The case for the prosecution is that one Bangshidar Moor, a Marwari gentleman-one of the partners of the Nagarmal Moor and Company which had a bucket factory on the Kolong Bank road of the Nowgong town was attacked his certain individual on the night of 26-8-1951 at about 8-30 p.m. and was stabbed with a knife or a dagger making a punctured wound on the abdomen. There was another minor injury on the right arm. The injured person fell down immediately on being struck and he was removed to a neighbouring shop of one Labchand where medical aid was rendered to him and the Civil Surgeon attended him immediately. The doctor removed the protruded omentum and stitched the injury under chloroform. He was subsequen...
Tirtha Bahadur Bhojal Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Deka, J.1. This appeal is from Jail on behalf of Tirtha Bahadur linojal alias Kurtha Bahadur Bhojal who was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, L. A. D. Under Section 302, Penal Code and sentenced to transportation for life. The accused was tried along with another person by the name of Jay Bahadur alias Lama Nepali of an offence Under Section 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code and the Jury having returned a verdict of not guilty against the other accused and one of guilty against the present appellant Under Section 302, I, P. C. he was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.2. The prosecution case is that one Kalaram Kalita of Majirgaon or the Palasbari Police Station started for Malaibari, a place about four miles off from the Railway Station at Khetri, on 16-4-1952, a Wednesday, with some money in his possession but he had not as a matter of fact arrived at his destination and was found to be missing since then. Three persons Govinda Ram Kalita, Lohit Kalita and Kalaram Kal...
State Vs. Mohanlal Sutadiya and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-21-1954
Deka, J.(1) This is a reference under 8. 438, Criminal P. C, by the Sessions Judge, U. A. D. recommending that a certain order of Mr. U. N. Rajkhowa, Magistrate 1st Class, dated 27-6-52 relating to forfeiture of a truck load of rice Under Section 7(2) (b), Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 be set aside. What happened was that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Golaghat detected on 25-6-1951 a truck load of rice being carried by the road leading to Negheriting Tea Estate without any permit and at his direction, the Inspector of Supply, Mr. S. Ahmad, seized the rice as the movement of rice was then under control and took the same with one Noporam Kumar in charge of the truck to the Central Trading Cooperative Stores at Golaghat and made over the same to them after the formalities of seizure were completed. The rice was sold through Cheap Grain Shops and the sale proceeds were deposited in the Treasury.Noporam Komar as well as Mohanlal Sutodla were prosecuted for violation of Sect...
Narendra Goswami and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-20-1954
Deka, J.1. This appeal is under Rule 21 of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Sib-sagar and Nowgong Mikir Hills Tracts read with Assam Regulation No. 10 of 1951, against an order of conviction passed by the learned District Magistrate of the United Mikir and North Cachar Hills. The appeal is on behalf of two persons, Narendra Goswami and Khagendra Barua who were convicted Under Section 19(f), Arms Act, and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment for alleged possession of a stengun without license.2. The case for the prosecution is that Lall Chand Namasudra, a Police Sub-Inspector, getting information from private sources about the illicit possession of a gun by Narendra Goswami arrived with some other persons in his company on 23-5-50 at the house at Bokajan where Narendra Goswami was staying. It was in the early hours of the morning and he roused from sleep Narendra Goswami as well as Khagendra Barua who lived in the neighbouring house in the same com...
Barmura Lalung and anr. Vs. Jara Singh Hazarika
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-16-1954
Ram Labhaya, J.1. This is a reference Under Section 438, Criminal P. C. from the learned Sessions Judge, Lower Assam Districts. The reference raises 2 questions which are as follows:1. Whether in a trial under the summary procedure, it is incumbent on the Magistrate to follow the procedure laid down in Section 257, Criminal P. C, if the accused refuses to plead or does not plead or claims to be tried? and,2. Whether failure on the part of the Magistrate to offer a chance to the accused to recall the prosecution witnesses as required Under Section 256, Cr.PC is a mere omission or irregularity curable Under Section 537, Cr. P. C?2. The facts leading to the reference may be briefly stated. The petitioners before the learned Sessions Judge, Bormura Lalung and Melbar Lalung were tried on a charge under Sections 447/427, Penal Code by Mr. Ahmed, Magistrate, first class, Nowgong. They were tried summarily and as a result of the trials were convicted Under Sections 447/427. Separate sentences...
Holiram Gaonbura and ors. Vs. Remeswar Das
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-14-1954
Sarjoo Prosad C.J.(1) This is a reference made by Sri R, Hazarika, Additional Sessions Judge, Lower Assam Districts, recommending that an order, dated 1-6-53, attaching the disputed land Under Section 146, Criminal P. C, should be set aside. The reference arises out of a proceeding Under Section 145, Criminal P. C. The facts appear to be that there was a Civil Court decree in respect of the disputed land in favour of the second party, in which the first party was the judgment-debtor. In execution, of the decree, the second party claimed to have obtained delivery of possession of the disputed land and to have continued in such possession thereof. They have also been mutated in respect of the land and have been paying Government revenue.The Magistrate, however, held that this delivery of possession which took place on 5-7-36, had not been satisfactorily proved, and that the first party who was the judgment-debtor, would be, therefore, presumed to have continued to occupy the disputed la...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›