Guwahati Court September 1956 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.
Jatindra Lal Saha Vs. Narendra Chandra Dev Barman
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-27-1956
Datta, J.C.1. In a case instituted upon complaint the non-applicant Narcndra Chandra Dev Barman alias Malukha, a Sub-Inspector of Police was tried on charges for offences punishable under Sections 342 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code alleged to have been committed on 4-8-1950. After the conclusion of the trial and after hearing the arguments the learned Magistrate disposed of the case by passing the following order in the order sheet dated 26-5-1955:26-5-55. Heard both parties. In consideration of the documents filed and considering all facts I find that no sanction has been obtained under Section 197 Cr. P.C. The Officer concerned has been accused of having committed the offences complained of when he was acting in the discharge of his official duty. The sanction must be obtained before any proceedings are taken. In the absence of sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. the case is dismissed under Section 203 of Criminal Procedure Code and the accused is acquitted.2. The complaint then m...
Kamakhya Prasad Agarwalla and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-03-1956
Deka, J.1. These are three consolidated appeals arising out of a Sessions trial held by the learned Additional Sessions Tudee, U. A. D., at Dibnurarh. Appeal No. 48(J) of 1956 has been filed from Jail by the four accused persons (1) Kamakbya Prasad Agarwalla, (2) Khitish Chandra Das, (3) Badalananda Ganguli, and (4) Siddique Mohammad. Accused Kamakhya Prasad Agarwalla has filed an appeal independently, it being Cr. Ap. No. 44 of 1936, and Badalanarida Ganguli also has filed another appeal independently, it being Cr. Ap. No. 52 of 1956.All these appeals were heard together, Kamakhya Prasad Agarwalla and Badalananda Ganguli being represented by learned advocates on their behalf; nobody, however, appeared on behalf of appellants Khitish Chandra Das and Siddique Mohammad. All the four appellants were found guilty of and convicted under Sections 366 and 376, I. P. C. and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment each on each count, the sentences running concurrently.2. The prosecutio...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›