Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 40Ind.Cas.295
1. We think the Magistrate was right in convicting the accused under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.2. There is no provision in the Railways Act for ejecting passengers except in certain circumstances, such as are specified in Section 120. Section 122 of the Railways Act of 1890 is not applicable to this case. The term 'railway' as defined in Section 3, Clause (4), excludes railway carriage. The term 'rolling stock' as defined in Section 3, Clause (10), includes it. There is no provision corresponding to Section 3, Sub-clause (10), in the old Acts of 1854 and 1879. Section 68 prohibits (raveling with-out a pass or ticket, but so to travel without intent to defraud is not a criminal offence. Here there is a distinct finding that there was no fraudulent intent. Section 113 provides that a person so travelling shall be liable to pay on demand by any railway servant an excess charge. This section corresponds to Sections 31 and 32 of Act IV of 1879. It is to be noticed that there was ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 42Ind.Cas.729
1. We think that this Rule must be made absolute. The procedure adopted by the Magistrate was wrong. Authority in support of this proposition is to be found in Guru Charan Aich In the matter of the petition of 1 C. W. N. 650. It appears to us that the course open to the Magistrate was to order a further enquiry; and, after he had made such an order, he might have proceeded as the circumstances of the case justified. But, without taking any such steps, by simply ordering the re-issuing of the warrants, he exceeded his authority. The bail bonds of the petitioners who are out on bail will be discharged....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 40Ind.Cas.694
1. This was a Rule obtained by the petitioner to show cause why the conviction and sentence complained of should not be set aside.2. The conviction was on the l8th of April 1916. On the 22nd of May 1916 an application by way of motion was made to the learned Sessions Judge asking that he would refer the case to the High Court. On the 29th of May the learned Sessions Judge dismissed that application. On the 26th of July a Rule was obtained in this Court by the petitioner, calling upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the conviction of the 18th April should not be set aside. In connection with this matter a question of practice arises. The rule which was laid down in accordance with the established practice of this Court was as follows : It is reported in the case of Khetra Mohan Giri v. Darpa Narain Giri 36 Ind. Cas. 979 : 20 C.W.N. 1170 : 17 Cr. L.J. 419 : 43 C. 1029. 'The well-known practice is that an application for revision must be made within sixty days from the date of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 51Ind.Cas.884
1. These appeals arise oat of a suit instituted by the plaintiff Gossain Ganpat Gir as Shebait of the deities, Salgram and Shiva Thakur, to recover possession of the properties in dispute, alleged to be the Debutter of the said Thakurs, after setting aside the alienations thereof, said to have been improperly made by the defendant No. 1, the former Shebait.2. One Amrita Gir, who belonged to the sect of 'Giri,' one of the ten classes of Dasnami Gossains, established the Thakurs Salgram and Shiva at Arapur in the District of Maldah. Persons belonging to the sect to which he belonged are bound to observe celibacy but can acquire properties and are succeeded by Chelas or disciples. Amrita Gir acquired certain properties and by his Will dedicated the properties acquired by him to the said deities, the exact nature of the dedication being one of the main questions in this case. By his Will he directed that on his death his Chela Bissonath Gir would be the Shebait and executor, and on the dea...
Tag this Judgment!