Madhya Pradesh Court August 1954 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 Stae Vs. Rashid and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ157
ORDERSathaye J.C.(1) This is a reference Under Section 432(1), Cr.PC from the Subordinate Judge-Magistrate, 1st class, Bhopal. The question referred is: 'Whether the Bhopal Cattle Slaughter (Restrictions) Ordinance, 1949, is 'intra vires' of the Chief Commissioner, Bhopal?'(2) The question arose in a trial of four persons, the non-applicants, for an offence Under Section 10 of the Ordinance. The learned Magistrate is of the view that it is not 'intra vires' of the Chief Commissioner inasmuch as there is nothing in the Ordinance to indicate (a) that it was necessitated by any emergency, and (b) that it was made and promulgated for the peace and good Government of the Bhopal State or part thereof, as required Under Section 12, Bhopal Legislative Council Act, 1922, as amended by such Act (No. I of 1940), under which it was made and promulgated by the Chief Commissioner.(3) The Bhopal Cattle Slaughter (Restrictions) Ordinance, 1949, was promulgated by the Chief Commissioner, Bhopal, on 13-...
The State Vs. Sohansingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-1954
Reported in: 1955CriLJ814
ORDERSamvatsar, J.1. This is a reference by the Second Additional Sessions Judge Indore.2. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:The non-applicant Sohansingh, son of Budha-singh Sikh, and others are being prosecuted by Gautampura Police in the Court of the Sub-divisional Magistrate Hatod. In the course of the trial the prosecution tendered, one witness by name Zunzarsingh. The witness Zunzarsingh happened to be present in the Court room when the other prosecution witnesses were being examined in the case. When his turn came and he was called in the witness-box an objection was raised on behalf of the accused that this witness could not be examined as he was present in Court and was hearing the evidence given by the other prosecution witnesses The trial Court upheld this objection of the defence and cancelled the evidence of this witness. Aggrieved by the order of cancellation of this evidence, the State preferred a revision in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge Indore an...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›