Madhya Pradesh Court December 1952 Judgments
Mathura Prasad Nand Ram and ors. Vs. State of Vindhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ975
Krishnan, J.C.1. This is a reference by the S.J. Nowgong on an application in revision from the learned Magistrate's order under both Sections 145 and 107, Criminal P.C. As understood by the parties the order is, firstly one under Section 145, Criminal P.C. that a part of a house in dispute is in the possession of Mathura Bani, who applied in revision, and another part is in possession of his half brother Jageshwar Bani (the opposite party) and secondly that both of them should enter into bonds to keep the peace as each has been trying to disturb the possession of the other over his part of the house The questions for decision are, whether and in what circumstances these two sections could be introduced in the same proceeding; secondly whether the mixing up of the two sections had misled the parties; and thirdly whether the Magistrate's finding that part of the house as in possession of Jageshwar Bani is perverse and against the trend of the evidence, and as such calls for this Court's...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Durghatia Vs. Ayodhya Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ1214
ORDERKrishnan, J.C.1. This is an appeal by the wife defendant in a suit by her husband for a declaration that she is not entitled to maintenance. The suit was dismissed by the learned Munsiff, but the first appellate Court passed a decree in the husband's favour.2. The points for decision are the following: Firstly tile form of the suit by the husband after the Magistrate ordered maintenance under Section 488, Cr.P.C. Secondly, whether the court-fee should be ad valorem as required by Section 7(2) and Section 7(4) or as for declaration under Article 17(iii), Schedule 2, Court-fees Act. Thirdly, on the merits whether the husband has succeeded in proving the wife's disqualification on the ground of her living in adultery.3. The facts of the case are the following : The plaintiff Ayodhya Prasad Brahmin had married the defendant appellant about 10 years before the present suit when both were children. After she came of age she used to stay sometime with her parents and sometime at the plai...
Tag this Judgment!Arjundas Khandelwal Vs. Basant Lal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ980
ORDERKrishnan, C.J.1. In this application by the private prosecutor in a pending sessions case two main questions have been raised; firstly, whether at this stage i.e. after the conclusion of the evidence, and before the beginning of the arguments the S.J. should be directed by this Court to make a further examination under Section 342, Cr.P.C. Secondly, whether that Court should be directed to admit further prosecution evidence under Section 540, Cr.P.C.2. The prosecution case is that the accused had committed the offences of cheating, forgery, and using a forged document. The reply is that the complainant himself sent the cheque through his servant for encashment at Allahabad with the endorsement already on it, and that the accused encashed it, and obtained the money; so that there was no cheating, no forgery, and no use of forged document, and at most a civil liability for the amount obtained on encashment. The present application is filed not by the Advocate-General, but by the com...
Tag this Judgment!Girdhar Gopal Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ964
ORDERDixit, J.1. In this case the petitioner Girdhar Gopal has been convicted by the City Magistrate, Lashker for offences under Sections 342 and 354, Penal Code and sentenced to six months and one year rigorous imprisonment respectively for each of the offences. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The Sessions Judge of Gwalior rejected an appeal preferred by the accused against the convictions and sentences. The applicant has now come up in revision to this Court.2. Before me, Mr. Bhagwandas Gupta learned Counsel for the applicant did not challenge the conviction and sentence of the applicant under Section 342, Penal Code, His contention was that Section 354, Penal Code offended against the provisions of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India and that therefore, Section 354 being void, the conviction of the applicant under that section was illegal. The argument of Mr. Gupta is that as the Penal Code does not make the act of assault or use of criminal force to any...
Tag this Judgment!Shive Sharnagat and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ990
Radke, A.J.C.1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the five appellants named above, under Section 402, Penal Code, sentencing them each to 3 years' R.I. and to a fine of Rs. 50, and to a further term of 2 months' imprisonment in default of fine.2. The prosecution story is that on the night intervening between 30th and 31st July 1951, the last four accused assembled in the house of accused 1 at Khokaria and made preparations for committing dacoity at Taraoli. They had in their possession guns and ammunitions for which they had no licence. Sobharam, Patel of the village, saw lamp light in the deserted house of the accused 1's brother, which is adjacent to his house. He, in the company of Sheikh Mohd., (P.W. 6) went to that house and found that all the accused were whispering. They peeped in from the house of Bakshi which is adjacent to the house in question. Soon after the accused 1 went out and returned to the room with a loaded gun and handed it over to the accused 2 to 5. Aft...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh and Vs. Dulare Kol and
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ1211
ORDERKrishnan, J.C.1. This is an application in revision from a conviction on a summary trial under Section 447, I.P.C., with a fine of Rs. 75/- and imprisonment in default. The trial itself was under Sections 447 and 323, I.P.C., but the applicant has been acquitted of the latter charge. The applicant has urged two points: firstly, that the land in dispute was given back into his possession, and secondly that he was not given an opportunity to cross-examine after charge.2. It is necessary to consider only the point of law. I note that there was cross-examination before charge but there was none after it. A summary trial under Chap. 22 is summary only in regard to the manner of recording evidence and noting the substance of the charge, if any. The rights given to the accused under the earlier Chapters, 20 for the summons case trial and 21 for the warrant case trial, are not, in any manner abbreviated. Section 263 makes this quite clear.3. Therefore, even in a summary trial for a warran...
Tag this Judgment!Lalaram Surajmal Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1952
Reported in: 1953CriLJ1764
Dixit, J.1. The appellant Lalaram and his brother Karansingh were tried by the Sessions Judge of Morena for an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code for the murder of one Jalim. At the end of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted Karansingh giving him the benefit of doubt. But agreeing with the opinion of the assessors, he found the appellant Lalaram guilty under Section 302, Penal Code and sentenced him to transportation for life. Lalaram has now appealed to this Court against the conviction and the sentence,2. The prosecution case was that the appellant Lalaram was a servant of Sukhpal Singh, the zamindar of Kodaira, Madhopur and other villages and that in that capacity Lalaram used to take forced labour from the villagers and also recover from them illegal exactions. As a result of these acts of Lalaram, the villagers were displeased with him and persuaded him to give up the service of the zamindar. The prosecution alleged that the conduct of Sukhpal S...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›