Guwahati Court May 1983 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.
Vinod Kumar Bhatra Vs. Mahendranath Phukan and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-1983
K. Lahiri, J.1. Upon hearing Mr. A.K. Bhattacharjee, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D.N. Choudhury, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate as well as Mr. S. Ali, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam, we make the following order as agreed upon by the learned Counsel for the parties which we also consider just and proper.That all aspersions against the petitioner and the members of his family are hereby expunged from the records, reports, judgments, orders and all the petitions. Those shall never be used in connection with any matter/case or proceedings. 2. We speak to the members of the police force, who are in-charge of submission of reports in connection with cases, proceedings or other matters, that they should be slow, circumspect and cautious in making allegations or imputations against responsible persons. No adverse remark, viz., that the members of a party are 'men of desparate character', a common phrase used by the police officers throughout India, should be used unless the police ...
Hargobinda Das Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-18-1983
K. Lahiri, J. 1. This is a Habeas Corpus application under Article 226 of the Constitution against the Order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Goalpara, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The purpose of detention was for preventing the petitioner 'from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of service essential to the community'.2. The substance of what lias been described as the 'grounds of detention', which he characterizes as the basis of the 'subjective satisfaction' of the detaining authority, may be summed up thus: That on 30-11-82 the detenu along with others attended 'a close door' meeting of AASU/AAGSP of Bijni Unit, discussed about observance of 24 hours Assam Bundh and decided to observe a Bundh at Bijni on 2-12-82. In the meeting it was decided that shops and business establishments, etc should be closed and the vehicles should be put off the road. The said meeting, it is stated. also decided to circulate leaflets and post pickets et...
Zohmingliana Vs. Government of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-18-1983
K. Lahiri, J.1. Since 1977 the petitioner is in jail in connection with a criminal case. Now in 1983 the Government, of Mizoram has become slightly ambulatory in submitting charge-sheet and to commence the trial. The petitioner is in jail for over 6 years. There cannot be any alibi for non-completion of the investigation for so many years. There cannot be any excuse as to why the case could not be disposed so long. The petitioner is in jail for over 6 years.2. What we find from the materials made available to us is that the only evidence appearing against the accused is the confession of the co-accused, as the petitioner states. We are confident that the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner. Aizawl, is fully aware as to the evidentiary value of the confession of a co-accused. We refer to (1) Kashmira Singh : 1952CriLJ839 . (2) Kalawati : 1953CriLJ668 , (3) Nathu : : 1956CriLJ152 (4) Ramchanclra : 1957CriLJ559 , (5) : [1968]2SCR641 Haroon Haji Abdullah v. State of Maharashtra as some of t...
R.L. Poddar Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-17-1983
N. Ibotombi Singh, J. 1. By this application under Article 226 of Constitution, the petitioner challenges the validity of the order dated 17-9-1982, Annexure VIII, passed by Sri S.K. Agnihotri, District Magistrate, Kamrup, Gauhati. 2. By our short order dated April 23rd, 1983, we quashed the impugned order stating that reasons would follow. We now state our reasons. 3. The petitioner obtained licence from the Chief Controller of Explosives, Nagpur, being licence No. Ex.-25 (3) 164/ AS-282/ Ex in form 'L' for possession and sale of explosives under the Indian Explosives Act, 1884 (IV of 1884), read with the Explosives Rules, 1940, framed thereunder. The licence was renewed from year to year after expiry of the term each year on the 31st March. Subsequently the licence is renewable at the end of every two years. The Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, East Circle, Calcutta, under his letter No. As-282-Ex dated 30th Jan. 1974, informed the petitioner that its licence shall be deemed...
Jyoti Prasad Baruah Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-17-1983
B.L. Hansaria, J. 1. Both these petitions relate to one detenu; Rule in one was issued having received a communication from jail, and the other is a regular petition challenging the detention under the provisions of the National Security Act, 1980, hereinafter the Act.2. We have been called upon to adjudge the legality of an order passed on 19-2-83, the grounds of which are dated 23-2-83 and read:On Feb. 12, 1983 at about 23.30 hours you along with Phatik Bora and Ghana Bakalial laid an ambush to a C, R. P. F. foot patrol by concealing yourselves behind boundary wall of H. F. C. Namrup L. P. School and attacked the CRPF party by throwing a bomb first and then one round of fire from a sten gun. When the C. R. P. F. made counter-attack your two associates fled away and you were caught red-handed with a sten gun, two magazines with 31 rounds ammunition, and three hand bombs.Your activity described above is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and your detention is immediately ...
Md. HesabuddIn and ors. Vs. Md. HesaruddIn and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-12-1983
S.M. Ali, J. 1. This appeal arises from the judgment and decree passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, Goalpara, Dhubri in Title Appeal No. 66 of 1975 dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and decree passed by learned Munsiff, Goalpara in Title Suit No. 160/71 dismissing the suit. The suit is for declaration of title and delivery of khas possession on partition of the suit land. 2. Gende Bibi died leaving the three plaintiffs and four defendants in the suit, own brothers and sisters as her legal heirs with respect to the suit property consisting in 7 and odd bighas of land as described in the plaint schedule. It is the case of the plaintiffs that on the death of their mother Gende Bibi. The plaintiffs and defendants made an amicable partition of the suit property and each started possessing his/her share of the property but defendant No. 3 Serajuddin surreptitiously got the entire land recorded in his name in the revenue records and has been trying to dispossess t...
Dwijendra Kumar Bhuyan and Etc. Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-1983
K.N. Saikia, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel of both the parties. This batch of eleven cases impugn the respective orders of cancellation revocation of the petitioners' appointment as 'appointed retailers' under the Assam Foodstuffs (Distribution) Control Order, 1958. The ground of cancellation is stated to have been the keeping of the Fair Price shop closed on 15.6.82 in all these cases.2. Admittedly 15.6.82 was Assam Bandh day when the society was kept at stand-still and the petitioners1 case is that under that circumstance it was not possible for the petitioners to have kept their shops open for the security of their lives and property. Admittedly no hearing, as contemplated by law, was given to the petitioners.3. In a Bench decision of this Court in Civil Rule No. 887 of 1981, disposed of on 16.12.82 reported in 1983 (1) Gauhati LR 377, it has been tersely held that under such circumstances the petitioners are entitled to a fair hearing according to the law failing which there will...
Md. Samsul Haque Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-03-1983
T.C. Das, J.1. The appellant who has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Goalpara at Dhubri in G. R. Case No. 153 of 1980 under Section 302, I. P.C, sentencing him to imprisonment for life, has preferred this appeal from jail. The sentence of imprisonment for life was awarded to the appellant for intentionally causing the death of Sahera Khatoon, daughter of Bagu Dewani a resident of Simalabari under Bongaigaon police station.2. We propose to start with this case by quoting Narotam Singh's case : 1978CriLJ1612 wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court have observed:The law of crimes perverts itself on occasions into the crime of law if narrow legalism overwhelms social justice. This criticism applies to the field of penology as well, and so the finer more perceptive and sociologically relevant approach to punishment, when crime has been proved, is to take a holistic, realistic and humanistic size-up action as to promote rehabilitation without offending community conscien...
Lalit Rajkhowa Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-02-1983
K. Lahiri, J.1. The petitioner has been detained by the State Government under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, for short 'the Act' for preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to (1) the maintenance of 'public order' and (2) the supplies and services essential to the community. The petitioner has questioned the validity of his detention in this Habeas Corpus application.2. The competent authority may detain any person under the Act on the basis of 'subjective satisfaction' reached by it However, the power of detention is limited to certain activities only, namely, if the activities are prejudicial to the security of the State and/or prejudicial to public order and/or prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. This is a preventive measure and detention is permissible even on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.3. The petitioner has questioned the validity of the detention and complains, inter alia,...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›