Kolkata Court March 1923 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.
Raghunath Mody Alias Raghunath Ram Vs. the Kurseong Municipality
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal561,76Ind.Cas.394
1. This Rule is unopposed. After hearing the learned Vakil for the petitioner we are of opinion that it most be made absolute on both the grounds on which it was granted.2. The petitioner has been convicted of committing an offence tinder Section 6 of the Bengal Food Adulteration Act, VI of 1919. Section 15 of that Act provides that no prosecution for any offence under the Act shall be instituted without the order or consent in writing of the local authority within whose jurisdiction the offence is committed. The offence is alleged to have been committed within the Kurseong Municipality. Under Section 2 (4)(1) of the Act, local authority is defined as meaning in the case of any Municipality, the Municipal Commissioners. The Municipal Act in force in Kurseong is Act III of 1884. Section 44 of that Act enables the Chairman, for the transaction of the business connected with this Act or for the purpose of making any order authorised thereby, to exercise all the powers vested by this Act i...
Jagatbandu Saha and anr. Vs. Jagabandhu Saha Sardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1923
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.432
1. We hold that this Rule must be made absolute on the second of the grounds on which it was issued, that is that the Magistrate was functus officio and acted without jurisdiction in delivering the order under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, which the petitioners wish to set aside. The Magistrate heard the case as Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Nafaingunge. On the 18th November he handed over charge of bis office as Sub-Divisional Officer on transfer to Barackpore.2. Once he had handed over charge he ceased to have any jurisdiction, as Magistrate in the Dacca District and, therefore, as was held by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Empress of India v. Anand Sarup 3 A. 563 : A.W.N. (1881) 3753 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 343, the case which was followed' by this Bench in Baishnab Charan Das v. Amin Ali 72 Ind. Cas. 953 : 38 C.L.J. 202 : 50 C. 664 : 24 Cr. L.J. 489, we must hold that the final order passed by him was without jurisdiction.3. We accordingly make this Rule absolute and set a...
Eran Khan Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal47
Panton, J.1. This appeal is preferred by seven persons, all of whom have been convicted under Section 326 read with Section 149, three under Section 148 and four under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. These offences are alleged to have been committed in connection with a riot which occurred at what has been described as a 6 cottah plot which one Hossain Mridha was engaged in ploughing Hossain Mridha, according to the evidence, was struck on the head, and received injuries from which he subsequently died.2. The first point which has been urged by the learned vakil for the appellants is that the learned Sessions Judge was wrong in putting certain questions to the Jury at the time he was ascertaining their verdict. In leaving the case to the Jury the learned Judge said 'I shall want you to give me a clear verdict in respect of the offences under Sections 147, 148, 301, 326 and 325 for each of the accused.' When the Jury returned from a consideration of their verdict, the first questi...
Baisnab Charan Das Vs. AmIn Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal55
1. This case was heard by Babu Srish Kumar Sen, the Sub-divisional Officer of Karimgunge, in the District of Sylhet, and after the hearing of evidence the trying Magistrate was transferred to Hailakandi in the District of Cachar, and from there he sent a written judgment which was delivered at Kariragunge by Moulvi Mahomed Chowdhury, the Magistrate in charge of that Sub-division. The Code of Criminal Procedure makes no provision for delivery of judgment written by the Magistrate who heard the case after he had ceased to have jurisdiction in the District. Even if the Magistrate, Babu Srish Kumar Sen, after his transfer, had himself delivered this judgment, he would have acted without jurisdiction, as was held in the case of Empress v. Anand Sorup (1881) 3 All. 536. It is contended on behalf of the opposite-party that Section 350 would apply. Section 350 would, under certain circumstances, give the Magistrate at Karimgunge jurisdiction to decide the case on evidence recorded by his prede...
Abdul Rashid Sheikh and ors. Vs. Momtaz Sheikh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal229
1. This rule is directed against the order passed by the Sessions Judge of Murshidabad directing further enquiry under Section 437, Criminal Procedure Code, into the case in which the petitioners were discharged under Section 253, Criminal Procedure Code. The order of the learned Sessions Judge directing further enquiry is based solely on the ground that he gives less weight to the discrepancies in the evidence than has been given by the trying Magistrate. On the authority of the Full Bench ruling in the case of Hari Dass Sanyal v. Saritulla [1888] 15 Cal. 608, the Sessions Judge acted within his power in directing a reconsideration of the evidence. But we think that on the facts of the present case he did not exercise his discretion properly. The trying Magistrate in his judgment has discussed the evidence carefully, and has given reasons which in our opinion are sufficient to justify his conclusion that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was insufficient to support the charge ...
Sheikh Abdul Rashid and ors. Vs. Sheikh Momtaz
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1923
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.431
1. This Rule is directed against the order passed by the Sessions Judge of Mushidabad directing further enquiry under Section 437, Criminal Procedure Cade, into the case in which the petitioners were discharged under Section 253, Criminal Procedure Code. The order of the learned Sessions Judge directing further enquiry is based solely on the ground that he gives less weight to the discrepancies in the evidence than has been given by the Trying Magistrate. On the authority of the Full Bench ruling in the case of HariDass Sanyal v. Saritulla 15 C. 608 : 13 Ind. Jur. 55 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 989 (F.B.), the Sessions Judge acted within his power in directing a reconsideration of the evidence. But we think that on the facts of the present case he did no exercise his discretion properly. The Try(sic) Magistrate in his judgment has discussed the evidence carefully and has given reasons which, in our opinion, are sufficient to justify his conclusion that the evidence of the prosecution witnesse...
Baishnab Charan Das and ors. Vs. AmIn Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1923
Reported in: 72Ind.Cas.953
1. This case was heard by Babu Siis Kimar Sen, the Sub-Divisional Officer of Karimganj, in the District of Sylhet, and alter the heating of evidence the Trying Magistrate was transferred to Haila Kandi in the Distirct of Cachar and from there he sent a written judgment which was delivered at Karimganj by M. Muhammad Chowdhury, the Magistrate in charge of that Sub-Division. The Code of Criminal Procedure makes no provision for delivery of judgment written by the Magistrate who heard the case after he had ceased to have jurisdiction in the District. Even if the Magistrate, Babu Sris Kumar Sen, after his transfer, had himself delivered this judgment he would have acted without jurisdiction as was held in the case of Empress of India v. Anand Sarup 3 A. 563 : A.W.N. (1881) 37 : 2 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 343. It is contended on behalf of the opposite party that Section 350 would apply. Section 350 would, under certain diet instances, give the Magistrate at Karimganj jurisdiction to decide the case...
Nogendra Nath Bose Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1923
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.300
Newbould, J.1. In my opinion, this Rule should be discharged. The petitioner was tried and acquitted on a charge of having committed criminal breach of trust, in respect of Rs. 18,924-4-0, during the period between 1st October 1931 and 1st lb arch 1922. He is now being prosecuted on a charge of having committed criminal breach of trust, in respect of a sum of Rs. 100 on the 30th November 1921. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that, under Section 403 of the Code of Criminal. Procedure, the accused having been tried on the charge of defalcation committed within the periods stated, he is not liable for prosecution for any further defalcation committed during that period. There would be considerable force in this contention if it were shown that the defalcation, which is the subject of the present charge, could or might have been included in the former charge. But it is the case for the Crown, and on the materials before us I cannot say that that case will not be substantiated a...
In Re: Amulya Charan Dutt and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1923
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.424
1. This is a reference under Section 432, Criminal Procedure Code, made by the Third Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.2. The accused persons are charged with attempting to cheat the officer-in-charge of the Currency Office, Bombay, by claiming payment of halves of currency notes for 400 rupees. The declaration signed in support of the claim was posted in Calcutta, and the case for the prosecution is that the attempt at cheating, if there was one, was made in Calcutta. The learned Magistrate took a different view, and the Public Prosecutor supported him: thereupon the Magistrate ordered the records of the case to be sent to Bombay and called on the accused to give bail to appear in Bombay. The accused moved this Court against the Magistrate's order, and we set it aside, on the ground that the Magistrate had not all the materials before him, and we pointed out what should ensue from a finding, that the Magistrate bad no jurisdiction to try the case.3. The learned Magistrate has row comple...
Ram Kumar Das Vs. Nanda Kumar Shaha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal248,75Ind.Cas.27
1. The plaintiff is the appellant before us, and the facts which have given rise to the suit out of which this appeal has arisen are shortly stated as follows : The defendants Nos. 1 and 2, who are the landlords, sued the plaintiff for an order for registration of an alleged agreement in respect of a tank. They were unsuccessful. They then sued the old tenant defendant No. 7, one Rajani Raha, for the rent of the holding and obtained an ex parte decree. The latter applied for the setting aside of the said ex parte decree. During the pendency of that application, the defendant No. 7 applied for an adjournment of the hearing of the said application on the ground of his illness, and in support thereof used an affidavit which had been sworn to by the plaintiff who had purchased the holding, which had originally belonged to defendant No. 7, and who had been recognized as tenant by the landlords, i.e., the defendant Nos. 1 and 2. The affidavit referred to above was filed on the 10th February,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »