Skip to content

Guwahati Court August 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.

Aug 07 1954

Suresh Karmakar and ors. Vs. Sekh Ishu

Court: Guwahati

Decided on: Aug-07-1954

Brij Narain, J.C.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge, Agartala, Tripura, under Section 438, Cr. P. C., by which recommendation has been made that the conviction of Suresh Karmakar under Section 379, I. P. C., be set aside.Suresh Karmakar has been convicted by Sri S. C. Kar, Magistrate, 1st Class Khowai, and not Kailashahar as has been incorrectly mentioned by the learned Sessions Judge in his reference. The learned Sessions Judge has committed another mistake in mentioning in his order of reference that Suresh Karmakar has been fined Rs. 50/- when as a matter of fact the learned Magistrate had imposed fine of Rs. 40/- only on him. The learned Sessions Judge has shown only Suresh Karmakar as the petitioner when as a matter of fact Suresh Karmakar, Upendra Chandra Karmakar and Surendra Chandra Sukla Baidya were the three petitioners in this case and all of them had been convicted by the learned Magistrate.2. Ishu complainant alleged that the petitioners had harvested t...


Aug 06 1954

Akbar Ulla and ors. Vs. Farmaj Ulla

Court: Guwahati

Decided on: Aug-06-1954

Brij Narain, J.C.1. This is a reference Under Section 438, Cr.PC by the learned Sessions Judge of Tripura recommending that the sentences of fine imposed on Akbar Ulla, Yakub and Ajiruddin Under Section 427, IPC should be set aside while no such report has ben made as against the remaining conviot Chhabed Ulla.2. I have heard the learned Government Advocate and also the learned Counsel for complainant Farmaj Ulla at length. It appears that three elephants belonging to the accused damaged and destroyed the sugar-cane crop of the complainant on two kanis of land in Silchhera on several dates causing loss to the complainant to the extent of Rs. 300/-. The learned Sessions Judge was of •opinion that it was not proved in this case that the three accused whose case has been recommended had an intention to cause any wrongful loss to the complainant and so the latter could seek his remedy in Civil Court,3. I am unable to agree with the learned Sessions Judge in holding that there is no e...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial