Kolkata Court June 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.
The Government of Assam Vs. Sahebulla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal1
ORDERBuckland, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government of Assam against a judgment of the senior Extra Assistant Commissioner at Dhubri acquitting 12 persons charged under Section 147, Indian Penal Code, as members of an unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to resist the execution of a warrant of arrest.2. For the present purpose a bare outline of the facts suffices, for there has been no decision upon the merits and this appeal turns wholly upon a question of law and if it succeeds a remand is inevitable.3. Certain constables were deputed to execute a warrant of arrest against a recalcitrant witness of the name of Sanaka Bibi in connection with a criminal case in the Court of the Extra Assistant Commissioner. The execution of the warrant was resisted, and the learned Judge has held that the warrant was illegally issued with the consequence that the resistance did not amount to an offence. The warrant was issued under Section 90 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but it appe...
Government of Assam Vs. Sahebulla
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal1
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a Reference by two learned Judges of this Court sitting as a Criminal A ] ] e Bench; and, the question referred is--'If a Court, under Section 90 of the Criminal Procedure de issue a warrant for the arrest of any person as hrein specified, but does not first record its reasons in writing, has the warrant so issued any legal force and effect?'2. In my opinion it is necessary, and, at all events, advisable, to state the facts which gave rise to this Reference. One Safaiuddin took criminal proceedings against certain persons, under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that such persons had enticed away Sanaka Bibi, who was alleged to be the complainant's wife. A warrant was issued by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, who was a first class Magistrate, for the arrest of Sanaka Bibi in order that she might be brought before the Court as a witness in these proceedings. The warrant was in the following form:To The Police Officer in charge of thana Salmora.Wh...
Government of Assam Vs. Sahebulla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1923
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.129
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a Reference by two learned judges of this Court sitting as a Criminal Appeal Bench, and the question referred is--'If a Court under Section 90, Criminal Procedure Code, issues a warrant for the arrest of any person as therein specified but does not first record its reasons in writing, has the warrant so issued any legal force and effect?'2. In my opinion it is necessary, and, at all events, advisable to state the facts which gave rise to this Reference. One Saifaiuddin took criminal proceedings against certain persons under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that such persons had enticed away Sanaka Bibi, who was alleged to be the complainant's wife. A warrant was issued by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, who was a First Class Magistrate, for the arrest of Sanaka Bibi in order that she might be brought before the Court as a witness in these proceedings. The warrant was in the following form:To--The Police Officer in charge of thana Salmo...
Bindubashini Roy Chowdhury Vs. Secretary of State for India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal70
Rankin, J.1. This is an application in revision whereby an applicant for probate complains of an order made by the Court below granting a review in a proceeding under Section 19H of the Court-fees Act being a proceeding wherein the Collector moves the Court to hold an enquiry into the true value of the estate of the testator. Broadly speaking, the facts are that the case was ordered to come on for hearing on the 6th January 1923. On that date neither party was ready. Both parties appear to have applied for an adjournment, and the learned Judge at first was minded to grant them an adjournment till the 21st January. Shortly afterwards, two witnesses for the Collector put in appearance and the order granting the adjournment was vacated and the case commenced notwithstanding the objections of the pleader for the present petitioner. The two witnesses on behalf of the Collector were heard and they did not take the case for the Collector any farther. The Government pleader wanted an adjournme...
Garibulla Akanda Vs. Sadar Akanda and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal813
1. The facts connected, with this Rule, shortly stated, are as follows:There was a fight on the 20th of November, 1922, between two parties, namely, Garibulla and his men on one side and Painuddin and others on the other side. Both parties instituted criminal cases in Court, having first made reports at the thana soon after the occurrence on the 2lst November 1922. The petitioner, Garibulla, complained before the Sadar Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Dinajpur against Painuddin and certain other persons. This complaint was referred to the Police for investigation on the 2nd December, 1922. Painuddin lodged a complaint in Court against Garibulla and this also was referred to the Police for enquiry and report. The Police sent in two reports. The correctness of the report sent in the case of Giribulla was challenged by the latter. Thereupon, it appears, the partias were asked to prove their respective versions of the two cases. On the 22nd December, 1922, one Mainulla complained before the Sa...
Sailendra Chandra Singh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal153,77Ind.Cas.812
1. This Rule was limited to the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate has submitted an explanation in which he pointed out that there was an examination of the accused under the provisions of Section 342 as would appear from the record of such examination on the back of the form used for examination under Section 364. We have looked into the record. We are not prepared to say that there has been in this case a substantial compliance with the provisions of Section 342.2. In that view of the matter, the retrial from the point at which the accused should have been examined under Section 342 would seem to be necessary. But Mr. Mukherjee who has argued on behalf of the petitioners has brought to our notice the fact that out of the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month the petitioners have already under, gone the sentence for a period of 22 days. In those circumstances the petitioners have not displ...
ibrahim Mallick Vs. Lalit Mohan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal388,79Ind.Cas.489
Rankin, J.1. This is an application on the part of the defendant under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. It appears that the plaintiffs on the 28th February, 1918, obtained a judgment against the defendant and certain co-sharers of the defendant for rent. On the 11th February, 1920, according to the plaintiffs' case, the plaintiffs entered into a contract with the defendant that in consideration that the plaintiffs would not seek to enforce their judgment, the defendant would pay the amount thereof with interest at 12 per cent per annum in April 1921. By April, 1921, the original judgment would become and has become time-barred and execution proceedings could no longer be taken upon it. The present suit was brought against the defendant on the 31st March, 1922. The plaintiffs have proved the contract alleged, and the present application is based upon the contention that such a contract as is alleged and proved is not valid in law. It is pointed out that the contract ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›