Madhya Pradesh Court August 1957 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.
Mohanlal Murlidhar Vs. Ramcharan Deviprasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP83; 1958CriLJ520
Dixit, J. 1. This is an appeal by leave of this Court by the complainant Mohanlal against a decision of Mr. M. P. Bhatnagar, First Class Magistrate, Ujjain, acquitting the respondent of a charge under Section 500, I.P.C. 2. The prosecution was started by Mohanlal in the following circumstances. Mohanlal had obtained a decree against a brother of the respondent Ramcharan and had initiated execution proceedings of the decree. On 20th September, 1954, Mohanlal happened to go to one Malkhan Bahadur, who is employed as a Head time-keeper in Hira Mills and mentioned to him the matter of the decree that he had obtained against Ramcharan's brother. About this time Ramcharan came to the office of Malkhan Bahadur and on seeing the appellant Mohanlal, Ramcharan abused him in very vulgar terms and also made the statement that the appellant's wife had illicit connection with his brother against whom the appellant had obtained the decree. Thereafter the appellant fiied a complaint in the Court of th...
Vireshwarrao Agnihotri Vs. State of Madhya Bharat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP225; 1957CriLJ1411
Abdul Hakim Khan, J.1. The accused who was a Tax-Collector in the Municipal Committee, Gwalior, was convicted by the Special Judge, Gwalior, under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment'. He has filed this appeal against his conviction and sentence.2. The prosecution case shortly stated is that the accused was a Tax-Collector in the Municipal Committee, Gwalior. His business was to collect tax and deposit it in the Municipal Treasury. It is said that ho collected a sum of Rs. 4,750-2-0 but did not deposit it in the Municipal Treasury. It is also said that he collected a sum of Rs. 3,071-15-0 but did not at once deposit the amount as required by the rules. He kept the money with him for some time and that he deposited it later on.3. The learned counsel for the accused-appellant has raised many contentions and I consider them below in the order in which they have been raised.4. The first objection raised is that the charge was not proper...
Union of India (Uoi), Through Secretary Railway Board and ors. Vs. Gen ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP314
1. This first appeal has been filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Mandla, in civil suit No. 3-B of 1951 decreeing the claim of the plaintiffs for Rs. 6,886/6/- and costs. 2. It is not disputed that the firm of Keshrimal Shrikishan of Sangli had despatched to self a consignment of 62 bags of chillies weighing 62 maunds from Sangli railway station to Nainpur railway station on 14-12-1950. This consignment had not reached Nainpur till 6-7-1951, the date on which the present suit was filed. 3. The case of the plaintiffs was that Keshrimal Shrikishan endorsed the railway receipt in their favour after a sum of Rs. 600/- and another sum of Rs. 5059/4/- were paid to him for the value of the goods. As the consignment did not reach the plaintiffs they filed a suit for recovery of damages consisting of the amount paid, the price of empty bags and profits at the rate of 20 per cent. 4. The defendants denied the endorsement of the railway receip...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Babulal Ramratan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1957
Reported in: 1958CriLJ190
Dixit, J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Sessions Judge of Indore acquitting the respondents Babulal Shukla and Lal Shukla of charges under Section 307, I. P. C. and Sections 19(e) and (f) and Section 20 of the Indian Arms Act and Babulal Tiwari of a charge under Section 307, I. P. C., read with Section 34, I. P. C. At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal, we announced our decision of dismissing the appeal saying that the reasons for our decision would be given later on. Accordingly, we now proceed to give our reasons. 2. The general nature of the case alleged by the prosecution was that Babulal Shukla was on terms of enmity with one Bhagwati for the last eight or ten years; that on the evening of 22nd November 1955, between 8-30 and 8-45 p.m., when Bhagwati was at the shop of one Kanhaiyalal inflating the tyre of a cycle, the three accused persons and one Sahdev, who is said to be absconding, came in a car suddenly and stopped the car just behind Bhagwati; that Bab...