Madhya Pradesh Court October 1952 Judgments
Gyarsibai W/O Jagannath Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ588
Dixit, J.1. The appellant has been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Shajapur of an offence under Section 302, Penal Code, for the murder of her three children and also of an offence under Section 309, Penal Code, for an attempt to commit suicide. She has been sentenced to transportation for life under Section 302 Penal Code, and to six months simple imprisonment under Section 309, Penal Code. Both these sentences have been directed to run concurrently. She has now preferred this appeal from Jail against the convictions and sentences.2. The facts of this case are very simple. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, her children, her husband Jagannath and her sister-in-law Kaisar Bai used to reside together. There were constant quarrels between the appellant and her sister-in-law and very often Jagannath used to slap the appellant for picking up a quarrel with her sister-in-law Kaisar Bai. It is alleged that one such quarrel took place on the morning of 14.8.1951 when Jagannath was...
Tag this Judgment!Surajmal S/O Dayaram and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-14-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ629
ORDERDixit, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Guna, recommending that the conviction and sentence of the applicants Suraj Mal and others by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Chachoda under Section 323, I.P.C. be set aside.2. It appears that the applicants were challaned in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chachoda, for an offence under Section 147, I.P.C. The trial Magistrate did not find the charge under Section 147 prima facie established. He accordingly charged the accused for an offence under Section 323 I.P.C. At the end of the trial the learned Magistrate convicted the accused under Section 323, I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-.3. The accused persons filed a revision petition before the Sessions Judge of Guna who was of the opinion that an offence under Section 323, I.P.C. being exclusively triable by the Panchayat Court under the Madhya Bharat Panchayat Vidhan Samvat 2006 (Act No. 58 of 1949), the trial and the con...
Tag this Judgment!Sitaram Bhola Ram and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ600
ORDERDixit, J.1. This is an application for a revision of an order of the Sessions Judge of Guna affirming the convictions of the applicants under Section 379, Penal Code and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- each.2. According to the prosecution on the afternoon of 12.10.50, the applicants went towards the field of the complainant Thakur Lal. unyoked a bullock belonging to the complainant and took it away against the wishes of the complainant and left in its place a bullock which the applicants had some months before purchased from the complainant, Sitaram pleaded alibi. The applicant Narayan said that the complainant voluntarily handed over the bullock to the applicant; while the remaining two applicants Jagdish and Ajju said that when Thakur Lal sold a bullock to the applicants, he had promised that in case the applicants were not satisfied with the bullock sold to them, he would give them another bullock and that accordingly they went to the Held of the complainant to return...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Dallu Punja
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-10-1952
Reported in: 1954CriLJ1052
Shinde, C.J.1. This is a criminal reference under Section 29 (b) of the High Court of Judicature Act Section 2005. The Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar made a reference under Section 438, Criminal P. C. recommending that the order of anticipatory bail passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Khargone on 22-C-1951 be set aside. The reference was placed for hearing before my brother Mehta J. During the course of arguments his attention was drawn to a recent decision of my brother Khan J. in - 'State T. Mangilal' AIR 1952 Madh-B 161 (A), in which he held that anticipatory bail can be granted. Mehta J. being of the opinion that anticipatory bail cannot be granted under Section 497, Criminal P. C, has made this reference to a Pull Bench under Section 29(b) of the High Court of Judicature Act.2. The question referred to the Full Bench is AS follows:Whether Section 497 of the Criminal P. C. empowers the Magistrate or the Court of Session and the High Court to grant bail to a person who i...
Tag this Judgment!Ramprashad Vs. the State of Bhopal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ702
Sathey, J.C.1. This is an appeal from Jail by one Ramprashad, son of Thukra, who is convicted of rape under Section 376, Penal Code, and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs. 100 or in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in Sessions Trial No. 14 of 1952.2. One Mst. Jaitul (p.w. 2) a blind girl of about 11 years lived with her uncle Mangal (p.w. 8) near village Joshipur in a camp of labourers working on a kiln. On 24.2.51 late in the morning she along with her cousin Mst. Jagoo (p.w. 7) of the same age and a boy named Chaitoo aged 10 years, was going towards village Joshipur when near a lonely part of the road the appellant Ramprashad about 20 years of age who was a stranger to the children, came from the opposite direction and frightened them saying that the Census Officers were coming and would catch them. The children being afraid began to run away but the appellant caught hold of M...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir Prasad Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-06-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ570
ORDERDixit, J.1. This reference arises out of a criminal case pending in the Court of Additional District Magistrate, Bhind in which the accused persons are said to have been granted 'anticipatory bail' by the Additional District Magistrate on the authority of the decision of Abdul Hakim J., in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 2 of 1951. By this reference purporting to be one under Section 438, Criminal P.C. Mr. L.C. Gupta the District Magistrate of Bhind desires that this Court should take into consideration the points mentioned in para. 4 of the reference while reconsidering the decision of this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous application No. 2 of 1951. The District Magistrate says in his reference:3. Since I understand that the said ruling is still under consideration of the High Court, I make this reference for consideration of r the High Court mainly on the ground that the wordings of the Section 497 as they stand today do not admit of grant of anticipatory bail as discussed...
Tag this Judgment!Dhannu Lal Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-06-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ634
ORDERDixit, J.1. This is a revision petition from an Order of the District Magistrate of Shivpuri upholding an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Shivpuri by which he directed the forfeiture of a bond furnished by the applicant for the appearance of certain persons who had been implicated for an offence under the Gwalior Opium Act, Smt. 1980. By the bond the applicant undertook to produce the accused persons before the police or the Customs Department or the Court on any day as directed. It appears that on 26.4.49 the applicant, who stood surety for the appearance of the accused persons in the sum of Rs. 4000/- was directed by the Superintendent Customs Department Shivpuri, to produce the accused persons before him, on 2.5.1949. The applicant failed to do so. Thereupon, the Superintendent, Customs Department made a report to the Magistrate for the forfeiture of the surety bond. The report was purported to be Under Section 58, Excise Act. The learned Magistrate held that the provisi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›