Orissa Court March 1956 Judgments
indramani Pradhan and ors. Vs. Chanda Bewa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-12-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Ori191; 22(1956)CLT219; 1956CriLJ1218
ORDERNarasimham, J.1. This revision is against the judgment of the appellate Magistrate of Cuttack maintaining the conviction of the petitioners under Section 352, I. P. C. under the following circumstances.2. On 14-6-1951, a police constable (P. W. 6) went to village Dihapahalo where the parties reside, with a view to serve a notice under Section 144, Cr. p. C., on the petitioners directing them not to enter hi to the disputed house or to interfere in any way with its possession by Chanda Bewa (opposite party). It was alleged that though the notice was shown to the petitioners, they disregarded the order contained in the notice, forcibly dragged out Chanda Bewa from the house and locked it up.After due enquiry, the Magistrate concerned filed a complaint for the prosecution of the petitioners under Section 188, I. P. C., for disobedience of his order under Section 144, Cr. P. C. That case ended in acquittal on 26-2-53 in the Court of a First; Class Magistrate, Cuttack. Then a complaint...
Tag this Judgment!Jadumoni Mangaraj Vs. Sarat Chandra Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-09-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Ori209; 22(1956)CLT195; 1956CriLJ1419
ORDERPanigrahi, J. 1. This petition under Section 439, Criminal P.C. is directed against an order dated 6-11-1955 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack, directing the petitioner (accused) to pay Rs. 100/- as adjournment costs in a criminal case pending against him. The opposite party (complainant) is a Government servant and had to come from Sambalpur. His witnesses, four in number, who wore in attendance on that day came from Kendrapara, all of them being lawyers practising at Kenprapara. The allegation of the complainant was that he had spent a sum of Rs. 188/- for getting his witnesses from Kendrapara. The accused was absent on that day and a petition supported by a medical certificate was filed, praying for an adjournment of his case on the ground that he had been suffering from low blood pressure for the last three days and that he had been advised rest in bed for at least one month. The Additional District Magistrate observes that either the accused or his Advocat...
Tag this Judgment!Artatran Mahasuara and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Ori129; 22(1956)CLT351; 1956CriLJ909
P.V.B. Rao, J.1. All these applications were posted for hearing to 24-2-1956 by our order dated 20-2-1956. They were heard together on the 24lh and this judgment covers all the cases.2. These are eleven applications filed by 39 persons in judicial custody in Puri Jail under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Sections 496, 497 and 498 Criminal P. C. for the issue of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus as their detention was illegal. They also prayed for release on bail.3. The main allegations of the petitioners in all the applications are that the petitioners are respectable citizens of Puri possessed of considerable property both moveable and immoveable; that they were arrested without a warrant; that the bail applications filed before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Sadar Sub-Division, Puri, were not disposed of that during the hearing of the bail applications, they came to know that they Were prosecuted for offences under Sections 146, 149, 435, 188 379, 332, 395 and...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›