Guwahati Court June 1976 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.
Tikam Chand Khatri Vs. Kamaleswar Bora and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-02-1976
K. Lahiri, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 read with Section 483 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by Shri Tikam Chand Khatri, an Advocate of Tezpur, Darrang, Assam, now a detenu under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, shortly termed as 'M. I. S. A.'2. His allegation, inter alia, is that while in such detention he forwarded a complaint petition to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Judicial), Goalpara, dated January 13, 1976, through the Superintendent of District Jail, Goalpara on which no due and adequate actions were taken by the learned Magistrate. His allegation, inter alia, was that at the instance of the Opposite Party No. 1 he was arrested by the then Officer in-charge of the Police Station, Tezpur, the O. P. No. 2 on 28-6-1975 at or about 6 A. M. and was detained until 1 P. M. He was served with an order of detention under the M. I. S. A., 1971 (as amended) and thereafter he was taken from the District Jail Tezpur and detained in Goalpara Jail and that t...
Hiralal Prasad Vs. State of Assam and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-01-1976
K. Lahiri, J.1. This is an application under Section 439 read with Section 520 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').2.-3. The relevant facts which are necessary for the disposal of this application are the following:On 29-3-1972, the present petitioner moved an application before the Sub-divisional Magistrate (J) at Kokrajhar, alleging inter alia that on 12-1-1969 the Opposite Party No. 2, the Sub-Inspector of Supply seized some paddy in Kachugaon Bazar and filed a complaint against one Hiralal Prasad Sah of Kachugaon under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act. It was stated inter alia that the said accused person did not claim the seized paddy during the course of the proceedings. The petitioner claimed that he was one of the agents of the Food Corporation of India, Branch Kokrajhar and was authorised to purchase paddy on behalf of the said Food Corporation under Gossaigaon Police Station including the forest area of Kachugaon t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›