Madhya Pradesh Court October 1949 Judgments
State Vs. Chogalal Narayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1949
Reported in: 1951CriLJ637
Sanghi, J.1. The resp. keeps a hotel in Gwaltoli indore. On 20.2.1945. the police searched his house in the coarse of the investigation of a theft. From an iron safe forty-three revolver cartridges were recovered; of these, it is alleged, twenty-four were old. What it meant by old cartridges has not bean explained. The respondent was prosecuted under Section 5, Indore Explosive Substances Act for being in possession of explosive substances without an explanation that he had them for a lawful object. The learned Dist. Mag. Indore City convicted him under that section & sentenced him to four months' rigorous imprisonment & a fine of Rs. 100. On appeal the learned Ses. J. acquitted him on the ground that the explanation rendered by him was a good one. The explanation given by the resp. was that he found these cartridges left by some one in the hotel. He kept them carefully to be returned to the owner. His brother in law Pannalal lives at Ujjain & he holds license for possessing a revolver...
Tag this Judgment!Hidayat Begam Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-1949
Reported in: 1951CriLJ233
ORDERSanghi, J.1. On 14-7-1949, one Kanakmal an itinerant tradesman made a report at 10-30 A. M. at the Sadar Bazar Police Station, Indore City that his wife Laxmibai had disappeared from the house carrying away with her cash amounting to Rs. 1700 and ornaments valued at Rs. 1900. He also stated in the report that he had learnt that Hidayat Begam (applicant) who lived in the neighbourhood used to visit his wife and Bhura her brother used to visit her sister and that Bhura was not to be found at his house. He therefore, suspected the applicant and her brother Bhura to be concerned in the theft committed by his wife.2. Seven weeks after this, on 8-9-1949, the applicant was arrested by the Officer-in. charge of the Sadar Bazar Police Station at 11-30 in the night. Under Section 167, Criminal P, C. the applicant was produced before the additional City Magistrate, Indore City, at 12-10 A. M. on is.9-1949 and an application was made for her further detention in police custody. The charge sho...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhulal Vs. Parwatibai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-1949
Reported in: 1952CriLJ868
ORDERRege, J.1. Mt. Parwatibai wife of Prabhulal instituted proceedings against her husband for maintenance under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The husband resisted the petition on the ground of infidelity of his wife. The learned Magistrate Bhanpura, allowed the application and directed that maintenance at Rs. 30/- per month should be given to Parwatibai. The opponent went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge, Garoth who has reported the case with a recommendation that the order of the Magistrate should be set aside and the case remanded for further inquiry. The learned Magistrate found the allegation of infidelity improved and it cannot be said that the finding is without foundation. It is in evidence, however, that the petitioner Prabhulal Is a minor and his means to pay the maintenance consist only of his interest in the joint family property. The learned Magistrate appears entirely to have ignored the meagre evidence tendered by the applicant Parwatibai re...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Hiralal Gangaram
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1949
Reported in: 1952CriLJ872
Rege, J.1. The opponent was put up before the District and Sessions Judge, Mandsour on an accusation of murder under Section 292 of the Gwalior, Tajirat. The proceedings preliminary to commitment which commenced on 24.6.1948 were closed so far as the prosecution was concerned on 25.1.1949, after a number of unnecessary adjournments several of which were on the ground of want of time. I would observe that the trial or enquiry in a case of this kind looses its importance by inordiante delay in the proceedings and a large number of adjournments by reason of want of time indicate inefficiency and want of control over the work. It ought not to be difficult for the Presiding Officer of the Court, to fix work in such quantity as will reasonably enable him to get through it so that parties may not be put to unnecessary inconvenience and expense and in criminal cases in particular the evidence being mostly oral and subject to loss of weight by lapse of time, the Presiding Officer must be astute...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›