Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1963Raj80; 1963CriLJ480
ORDERB.P. Beri, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against an order of the Sessions Judge, Sikar, by which he has held that fine imposed on the applicant must be realized notwithstanding the fact that he, the applicant, has undergone the sentence awarded against him in default of payment of fine.2. Applicant Hari Singh was employed in Court ofWards. He was accused of having criminally misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,995/-/9 entrusted to him in his capacity as such public servant and was convicted under Section 409 of the I. P. C. by the Sessions Judge, Sikar, on 28th February, 1955 to undergo six months simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-and in default thereof to further undergo a term of six months' simple imprisonment. Hari Singh appealed against this conviction to this Court but his appeal was rejected on 12-9-1955.3. The applicant served his substantive sentenceand did not pay the fine imposed on him. He was, therefore, made to suffer another six months' simple...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1962Raj134
Chhangani, J.1. This is a group of five appeals, all directed against separate orders of acquittal passed by Munsif-Magistrate, First Class, Thana Gazi, in cases under the Rajasthan Excise Act, and they all raise a common question of law, viz., whether in a warrant case instituted on a police report it is open to a Magistrate, after recording some evidence, to cut short the trial and refuse to examine the remaining prosecution witnesses and to proceed to record an order of acquittal ?2. The facts in the five appeals are similar though not exactly the same. We may set out the facts of criminal appeal No. 131 of 1960 for appreciating and deciding the question of law formulated above and the decision in that appeal will govern the decisions in the remaining appeals also.3. On June 9, 1959, the Excise Inspector Thana Gazi, recovered at the instance of the accused Suwa son of Lanhu, Kumhar of Chaturpura two pots full of 'pas', one 'degh', one 'babri' and one condenser--Implements for distil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1962Raj181
Chhangani, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Union of India representing the Western Railway Administration, Bombay, against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Bhilwara dated the 10th December, 1954, decreeing the plaintiff-respondents' suit for damages for an, amount of Rs. 7391-2-9 with costs and interest. The appeal initially came up for hearing before a Single Judge. The learned Single Judge having regard to the intricate nature of the questions involved in this appeal relating to the nature and extent of the liability of the Railway Administration under Section 72 read with Sections 47 and 54 of the Railways Act and the conflicting state of case-law thereon and other circumstances referred the case to a Division Bench and consequently the case has come before us.2. The facts leading to the appeal are these. The plaintiff Lachiram Gurdayal Mal, a joint Hindu family firm trading at Shahjehanpur having obtained permit marked Ex. 21 for the export of 2000 maunds of Lauta Gur fro...
Tag this Judgment!