Guwahati Court September 1972 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.
Majee Taha (Accused) Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-15-1972
Baharul Islam, J.1. The appellant, constable Majee Tana, has been convicted under Section 304 Part I. Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years, by the Deputy Commissioner Siang District Along NEFA. The appellant along with co-accused Lance Naik Pura Tajo. were charged under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code. The appellant was further charged under Section 307 of which he was acquitted. Accused Pura Tajo was also acquitted of his charge. The appellant was also acquitted of the charge under Section 302/34 but convicted and sentenced under Section 304 Part I against which the appellant has filed the appeal, and the Deputy Commissioner has made the reference under the provisions of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation. 1945. for confirmation of the sentence.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows:On 1.4.1969 two constables of the 23rd Battalion, Special Service Bureau (SSB). Yingkiong in Pasighat Sub-Division of the Siang Distric...
Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise Vs. Roshanlal Choura ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-12-1972
D.M. Sen, J.1. This Is an appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate. Imphal West, in a case where the accused was tried under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 for having illegally acquired possession of certain contraband precious stones weighing 17,967.510 grams worth Rs. 18.821.70 and a foreign made transistor radio worth Rs. 200/-.2. Although the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate held in his lodgment that the possession by the accused. respondent of the aforesaid precious stones and of the transistor had not been proved, we find there is sufficient evidence to prove such possession. In point of fact, the accused. respondent himself In a signed voluntary statement dated 10.7.1967 (Ext. P. 12) admitted the possession of the aforesaid articles. He, however, stated that he had purchased the precious stones in several lots from different persons in Manipur. And that the transistor was left with him in the hotel, where he was working, by so...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›