Guwahati Court December 1960 Judgments

Khomdram Ibomcha Singh Vs. Manipur Administration

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ502

1. This revision arises out of an order passed by the S.D.M., Mao on 6-8-1980 in Criminal Case No. 12 of 1960. The petitioner herein filed a complaint on 11-2-1960 against 11 persons under Seas. 149/386/506, I.P.C. in the Court of Shri Gumamani Singh, who was the predecessor in office of Shri Gokulchand Singh as First Class Magistrate, Mao. Out of the accused persons, accused Nos. 7 to 10 were officials of the Forest Department of the Manipur Administration, accused No. 7 being a Forest Ranger and the rest forest guards. The complaint against them was that on 16-10-1958, when the petitioner was in peaceful possession of the lime quarry Soukom as lessee from the Government, his possession was disturbed by the lessee of the neighbouring Kangkhanyumbi lime quarry and proceeding under Section 144, Cri. P.C. were started against him and on 15-11-1958, the final order was passed by A. D. M. confirming the possession of the petitioner and prohibiting the respondent therein from interfering wi...

Khomdram Ibomcha Singh Vs. Manipur Administration

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ502

ORDERT.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.1. This revision arises out of an order passed by the S.D.M., Mao on 6-8-1980 in Criminal Case No. 12 of 1960. The petitioner herein filed a complaint on 11-2-1960 against 11 persons under Seas. 149/386/506, I.P.C. in the Court of Shri Gumamani Singh, who was the predecessor in office of Shri Gokulchand Singh as First Class Magistrate, Mao. Out of the accused persons, accused Nos. 7 to 10 were officials of the Forest Department of the Manipur Administration, accused No. 7 being a Forest Ranger and the rest forest guards. The complaint against them was that on 16-10-1958, when the petitioner was in peaceful possession of the lime quarry Soukom as lessee from the Government, his possession was disturbed by the lessee of the neighbouring Kangkhanyumbi lime quarry and proceeding under Section 144, Cri. P.C. were started against him and on 15-11-1958, the final order was passed by A. D. M. confirming the possession of the petitioner and prohibiting the respondent t...

Thangjam Irabot Singh Vs. the State

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. In this case, the petitioner along with six others was prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 188 and 143 I.P.C. on a complaint filed by the District Magistrate and they were convicted under both the sections on the basis of their admission of the offences and the Magistrate punished them to the maximum sentences under each, of the sections, namely, one month's S. I. under Section 188 and Six months' R. I. underS. 143 I.P.C. The Magistrate did not give any reason why he awarded the maximum sentences under both the sections nor did he state whether the sentences were to run concurrently or consecutively, which meant that the sentences would run consecutively.2. Alter the conviction and sentence, the petitioner was transferred to Nowgong Jail in Assam while the remaining accused were retained in Jail in Manipur itself. Those retained in Manipur filed an appeal to the Sessions Court in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 1960 and the learned Sessions Judge set...

C.B. Sarma and ors. Vs. the State

Court: Guwahati

H. Deka, J.1. This rule was obtained by three persons who were convicted under Section 27 of the Industrial Disputes Act and sentenced to one week's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- each. On an appeal preferred by the accused persons the learned Sessions Judge reduced the sentence of imprisonment to one day's simple imprisonment, namely, till the rising of the court and the sentence of fine was kept intact. It is against this conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Judge that the petitioners have come up to this Court.2. The findings are very conclusive and there is no substance in the petition at all. What happened is that the accused persons instigated a strike amongst the sweepers of the Gauhati Municipality. Two of the accused persons Jayashri Harijan and Munilal Harijan were the President and the Vice-President respectively of the organisation known as Harijan Sangha and the other accused C.B. Sarma was an enthusiast who identifies himself with the cause of the H...

Jagneshwar Sen Gupta Vs. Bimal Kanti Paul

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C. 1. This is an appeal against the acquittal of the respondent by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 1959.2. The complainant-appellant, the Food Inspector of the Agartala Municipality went to the shop of the respondent on 5-11-58 and took samples of the mustard oil that he was storing for sale. On the said sample being examined by the Public Analyst of West Bengal it was found to be adulterated with ground-nut oil. Thereupon the appellant sought the permission of the Administrator of the Agartala Municipality (which had been superseded) to prosecute the respondent and written consent having been obtained the complaint was filed under Section 16(I)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 1954. The respondent was charged under the said section.3. In the course of the trial which followed the respondent did not contest the fact that the mustard oil was adulterated. His main contention in the Magistrate's Court as well as in the appeal was that t...

Md. Monohar Khan Vs. Tripura Administration

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ288

1. This is a revision against the order of the District Magistrate dismissing the appeal petition filed under Section 515 Cr. P.C. by which the District Magistrate confirmed the order of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Dharmanagar forfeiting the two bail bonds given by the petitioner as surety for two of the accused persons in G. R. case No. 14 of 1957 in which they were charged under Section 324 I.P.C. and issuing distress warrant for payment of the amount so forfeited2. The petitioner is a pleader practising in Dharmanagar Courts. He stood surety for the two accused Muchabbir Ali and Taleb All in the above case and he executed two surely bonds on 5-12-1958 agreeing to produce them in Courts on the dates to which the case was posted. On 8-5-1959 Muchabbir Ali and Taleb Ali were absent in Court and it was stated for the prosecution that they had proceeded to Pakistan.It was, however, mentioned for the surety that they were ill and that they would be produced at the next hearing on 20-6-1959. O...

Md. Monohar Khan Vs. Tripura Administration

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ288

ORDERT.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.1. This is a revision against the order of the District Magistrate dismissing the appeal petition filed under Section 515 Cr. P.C. by which the District Magistrate confirmed the order of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Dharmanagar forfeiting the two bail bonds given by the petitioner as surety for two of the accused persons in G. R. case No. 14 of 1957 in which they were charged under Section 324 I.P.C. and issuing distress warrant for payment of the amount so forfeited2. The petitioner is a pleader practising in Dharmanagar Courts. He stood surety for the two accused Muchabbir Ali and Taleb All in the above case and he executed two surely bonds on 5-12-1958 agreeing to produce them in Courts on the dates to which the case was posted. On 8-5-1959 Muchabbir Ali and Taleb Ali were absent in Court and it was stated for the prosecution that they had proceeded to Pakistan.It was, however, mentioned for the surety that they were ill and that they would be produced at the ne...

Khwairakpara Hingthemjao Singh and ors. Vs. Loupu Kom and ors.

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.1. The petitioners herein filed a petition under Section 144 Cr. P.C. before the A. D. M. on 13-7-1959, for restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession of a certain land in Saiton village which is on the boundary between the Churadhandpur sub-division and Bishenpur sub-division. The A. D. M. transferred the case to the Court of the S.D.M., Churachandpur for disposal and the latter proceeded under Section 145 Cr. P.C. in Criminal Case No. 5-C of 1959. He started proceedings by passing a preliminary order on 24-8-1959, and he directed the land to be kept under attachment.Thereafter notices were issued to both the parties. It is seen from the records that one of the respondents Loupa Kom of Mantha Khunou appeared before the Magistrate, No affidavits appear to have been taken from the parties. Instead, the Magistrate examined one of the petitioners and Loupu Kom for the respondents and he passed an order on 14-11-1959 holding that the petitioners ...

Khwairakpara Hingthemjao Singh and ors. Vs. Loupu Kom and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ650

ORDERT.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.1. The petitioners herein filed a petition under Section 144 Cr. P.C. before the A. D. M. on 13-7-1959, for restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession of a certain land in Saiton village which is on the boundary between the Churadhandpur sub-division and Bishenpur sub-division. The A. D. M. transferred the case to the Court of the S.D.M., Churachandpur for disposal and the latter proceeded under Section 145 Cr. P.C. in Criminal Case No. 5-C of 1959. He started proceedings by passing a preliminary order on 24-8-1959, and he directed the land to be kept under attachment.Thereafter notices were issued to both the parties. It is seen from the records that one of the respondents Loupa Kom of Mantha Khunou appeared before the Magistrate, No affidavits appear to have been taken from the parties. Instead, the Magistrate examined one of the petitioners and Loupu Kom for the respondents and he passed an order on 14-11-1959 holding that the petition...

James EdwIn Badshah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

H. Mehrotra, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution raises the question of the validity of the order, dated 26 December 1959, passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, opposite party 4, and another order, dated 3 March 1960, passed by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, opposite party 2, in the following circumstances.2. The petitioner was appointed as a lower division assistant in the Assam Secretariat on 10 February 1949. After passing the competitive examination conducted by the Assam Public Service Commission in the year 1950 the petitioner was confirmed on 19 May 1951, in the said post. On 21 September 1953 he was promoted as upper division assistant in the Assam Secretariat and was confirmed in the said post on 13 October 1958.3. The petitioner is still holding the post of upper divison assistant in the Excise Department of the Assam Secretariat and is drawing a salary of Rs. 300 per month in the scale of pay of Rs. 200-325. After a ...