Mumbai Court April 1924 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.
In Re: Pundalik Shankar Gujar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Bom448; (1924)26BOMLR440
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The accused was put up with several other persons who were charged before the Sessions Judge of Khan-desh with offences under Sections 382 and 457, Indian Penal Code. The present petitioner, who was accused No. 13 was charged under Section 382 together with Section 109, Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge said:-I have no hesitation in accepting the assessors' opinion on this point and hold with them that the offence of abetment of theft is not brought home to accused 13 I find him not guilty of that offence.There remains the question whether I would be justified in convicting accused 13 in this trial of an offence under Section 411 which I am satisfied he has committed. I do not think that I should, for I cannot hold that it is a minor offence under the major offence charged, The only facts proved against him show that he dealt in the stolen property after the offence of theft while he is charged with doing something prior to that theft.2. The Sessions Jud...
Emperor Vs. Shivaputraya Durdundaya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Bom456; (1924)26BOMLR438
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The two accused were charged before the First Class Magistrate with having committed an offence under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, and on conviction were sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment each, and in addition to a line. On appeal, for reasons which are not very apparent, the Sessions Judge altered the conviction to one of voluntarily causing simple hurt to the complainant and reduced the sentence in each case to six months' rigorous imprisonment. On the application of Government under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, a rule was issued for the enhancement of the sentences, and also for the convictions under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, being altered to convictions under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. We must take it that on the order of the Sessions Judge the accused were acquitted of the offence under Section 326, so that under the powers given to the Court under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, we cannot convert a finding of ac...
Emperor Vs. Shivputraya Durdundaya and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR48Bom510
Norman Macleod, Kt. C.J.1. The two accused were charged before the First Class Magistrate with having committed an offence under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, and on conviction were sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment each, and, in addition, to a fine. On appeal, for reasons which are not very apparent, the Sessions Judge altered the conviction to one of voluntarily causing simple hurt to the complainant and reduced the sentence in each case of six months rigorous imprisonment. On the application of Government under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, a rule was issued for the enhancement of the sentences, and also for the convictions under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, being altered to convictions under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. We must take it that on the order of the Sessions Judge the accused were acquitted of the offence under Section 326, so that under the powers given to the Court under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, we cannot convert a finding of acq...
Ganpati Gopal Risbud Vs. Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom44; (1924)26BOMLR754; 83Ind.Cas.370
Norman Macleod, C.J.1. The plaintiff in this suit is the hereditary Knot of Maluka in the Taluka of Mangaon in the District of Kolaba. From the year 1865 until 1914 the Khot of this village signed in each year a Kabulayat in favour of Government in a particular form. In 1915 the Government presented a new form of Kabulayat for the Khot's signature, and on his refusing to sign, the village was attached thus necessitating the filing of this suit in which the plaintiff prayed as follows:--A (1) The plaintiff in the capacity as a Khot has a permanent right of holding the village, of making recoveries in accordance with the Mamul practice and of management. It is neither necessary nor lawful to compel him to pass a Kabulayat of any description whatever.(2) The condition objected to in the statement hereto annexed cannot be asked for in writing in the Kabulayat.(3) The attachment of the Khoti village effected because the plaintiff did not pass a Kabulayat in writing as asked for by the defen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›