Guwahati Court July 1970 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.
Manohar Ali Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-21-1970
P.K. Goswami, C.J.1. This revision is directed against conviction Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The petitioner was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. The facts briefly are that the petitioner was a police constable under the Government of Assam posted at Silchar in 1947. At the time of partition of India, he opted for Pakistan and he was released from service under the Assam Government with effect from 13-12 1947 and he was directed to report to the Inspector General of Police in Dacca. It is said, that the accused-petitioner entered India on 3-10-1954 with > a Pakistan passport dated 26-11-1953 and Visa dated 6-8-1954 of Category 'B'. A photograph of the accused was pasted to the passport and the visa. He was thereafter found residing in the village Ramnagar in Cachar in September, 1965 and he was arrested and prosecuted' Under Section 14, as mentioned above.3. Prosecution examined six witnesses and the accused also examined two witnesses. The plea of the ...
Golak Chandra Dutta S/O Late Akshay Kumar Dutta and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-21-1970
R.S. Bindra, J.C.1. This Criminal revision by Bibhashini Dutta and Golak Chandra Dutta is directed against the judgment dated 30th of September by which the Sessions Judge, Tripura, rejected the appeal of the petitioners against their conviction Under Section 225, Penal Code, Golak Chandra Dutta had, in addition, been sentenced Under Section 323, Penal Code. Each of the oonviats waa sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100 on the charge Under Section 225, Penal Code or to Buffer one month's rigorous imprisonment. Golak Chandra was fined Rs. 50 I Under Section 323, Penal Code or in default to suffer 15 days' rigorous imprisonment.2 The story of the proseoution, in brief was that P.W. 3 Shanti Goswami informed the complainant Pabitra Kumar Das, P.W. 1, her neighbour at Abhoynagar, at about 7.30 p.m. on 16.10.1980, that she heard the sound of some commotion inside his dwelling hut. Pabitra Kumar took a lantern in his hand from the kitchen, where he was then taking meals, and proceeded in the direc...
Md. Hasamad Mia Vs. the State (Union Territory of Manipur)
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-15-1970
R.S. Bindra, J.C.1. This is an application by Md. Hasamad Mia, condemned to death, under Sub-clause (c) of Clause (1) of Article 134 of the Constitution for a certificate that the present case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. In the application as originally presented through the Jail only questions of fact bearing on the appreciation of evidence led in the case were relied upon in support of the prayer for the certificate. However, after this Court had appointed Shri A. Nilamani Singh, Advocate, as amicus curiae, to help the Court in deciding the application that Advocate presented a new set of grounds in justification of that prayer. Since it was stated at the bar that the original application had not been prepared by the prisoner with competent legal aid, I have decided to take into consideration the supplementary grounds while adjudging the merits of the application for certificate. In the supplementary grounds a question of law raised is that the learned Sessions Ju...
Maharabam Bokul Singh Vs. Thangjam Kundo Singh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-03-1970
R.S. Bindra, J.C.1. The prayer made in this criminal Revision Petition filed Under Section 439, Criminal P.C., is that the Order D/. 29-8. 1968 by which the committing Magistrate discharged the respondents of the offence Under Section 302, IPC, and the Order D/- G-ll-1968 of the Sessions Judge affirming the correctness of that discharge order, be quashed.2. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties I have cone to the conclusion that the prayer made by the petitioner is justified in law, According to Sub-section (6) of Section 207-A, Criminal P. C. the Magistrate can discharge the accused if in his opinion the evidence and documents on the record do not disclose grounds for committing the accused persons for trial. In other words, the Magistrate is required by law to find out if there are sufficient grounds to 'commit' the accused to the Sessions Court and not whether there is sufficient evidence to 'convict' him of the offence charged. It is settled that the duty of the Magist...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›