Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1955CriLJ49
Shah, C.J.(1) The question arising for consideration is whether if one an appeal from jail is summarily dismissed Under Section 421(1), Criminal Procedure Code, a fresh appeal filed by the same appellant through a pleader Under Section 419 can be heard.Under Section 421(1), the appellate Court is required to peruse the petition of appeal and the copy of the judgment appealed against and if the Court considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily; but by virtue of the proviso to the subsection an appeal presented Under Section 419 by the appellant or his pleader is not to be dismissed without giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard.By necessary implication therefore an appeal from jail may be dismissed without giving to the appellant an opportunity of hearing, and such dismissal is as final as the dismissal of an appeal filed Under Section 419 after giving a hearing to the appellant or his pleader. Sub-section (1) makes no d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1955CriLJ839
Baxi, J.1. The petitioners were convicted by the First Class Magistrate on a charge Under Section 384, I. P. C-read with Section 34, IPC and were sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 700/- and three months' rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine. They preferred separate appeals to the Sessions Judge, Halar Division, we confirmed their conviction but reduced the sentence of Labhshanker to three months rigorous imprisonment and set aside the sentence of fine. They have approached this Court in revision. As both the revisions arise out of a common judgment, they were heard together and are disposed of by this judgment.2. The facts which give rise to these revisions are briefly as under. The complainant is the manage of the Digvijay Weaving and Spinning Mills Ltd. of Jamnagar. The petitioner Bhanushanker was at the material time the editor of the paper 'Insaf which was published from Rajkot and the petitioner Labhshanker was employed by him as a sal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1955CriLJ1402
Shah, C.J.1. This reference from the Sessions fudge, Juna-gadh, arises from the following facts. The applicant Chhaganlal Madhvaji has obtained a decree against opponent 2 Khan Shri Fatehdinkhan, husband of opponent 1 Memunabi for Rs. 15,539 odd on 23-6-52 from the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Juuagadh, and by the said decree a charge was created on the cash annuity payable to the defendant Fatehdinkhan by the Government on the abolition of his Barkhali estate. The decree provided that the plaintiff was to receive the sum of the annuity directly from the office of the Vanthali Mahalkari and to credit it towards the decretal amount and further that in case the defendant paid off the decretal dues privately in one sum, the plaintiff was to have no right to the amount of the annuity payable by the Government to the defendant. In accordance with it, the sum of the annuity was recovered by the applicant-decree-holder in the years 1952 and 1953. Opponent 1 Memunabi then applied...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1960)1GLR133
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge of Kaira recommending that the order passed by the First Class Magistrate Nadiad rejecting the application by the prosecution for the return of the Muddamal Liquor to the Police for being sent to the Chemical Analyser. The prosecution filed an application before the learned Magistrate for the return of the Muddamal Liquor to the Police in order to enable the Police to send the Muddamal to the Chemical Analyser as the prosecution had only relied on the hydrometer test but in view of the recent ruling of the Bombay High Court is it necessary to get the liquor examined by the Chemical Analyser. The Magistrate was of the view that once the prosecution submitted a charge sheet it is to be considered that the police investigation has been completed. The Police cannot resume the investigation. He therefore thought that the request of the prosecution was not supported by any provision of law and he rejected the application.2....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1961Guj4; 1961CriLJ54
ORDERRaju, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge of Kaira recommending that the order passed by the First Class Magistrate, Nadiad, rejecting the application by the prosecution for the return of the Muddamal Liquor to the Police for being sent to the Chemical Analyser. The prosecution filed an application before the learned Magistrate for the return of the Muddamal liquor to the police in order to enable the police to send the Muddamal to the Chemical Analyser, as the prosecution had only relied on the hydrometer test but in view of the recent ruling of the Bombay High Court it is necessary to get the liquor examined by the Chemical Analyser. The Magistrate was of the view that once the prosecution submitted a chargesheet it is to be considered that the police investigation has been completed. The police cannot resume the investigation. He therefore thought that the request of the prosecution was not supported by any provision of law and he rejected the application....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1960Guj1; 1960CriLJ1200
(1) At the material time, the accused, house wife, the accused Jamuna and his two sons, the elder being Anther, were living in the village Bhandarda in the District of Sorath. They had come from Papilla to this villages only two or three months prior to the dates of the incident. The accessed had purchased a few months prior to the date of the incident certain fee lands which were situates about half a lie away from the village Bhandarada. On the 11th of May 1959, that being the Ganesh Chaturthi, the accused, the deceasesds Jamuna and their two sons went to a the place called 'Dhukhan' apparently to bring some earth from there. They had gone in apart belonging to the accused and there was a crow bar with them when they went to the place. At about 9 a.m., the accused returned to the villages accompanied, how-ever, only by his younger son about three years of age. While he was passing by the house of the AR Panache of the village, witness Bhaishanker Pranjivan, the accessed called out to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1960)1GLR127
V.B. Raju, J.1. These revision applications are in respect of an acquittal of one Khoja Habibhai Zaverbhai who was charged under Section 480 Indian Penal Code. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Radhanpur acquitted him in Criminal Case No. 49 of 1959 and the Revision application was filed before the Bombay High Court which was No. 2013 of 1959. In that application it was ordered by the High Court of Bombay that a revision application should be filed before the Sessions Judge and the matter was sent back. A revision application had accordingly been filed before the Sessions Judge who has however dismissed it. The complainant has therefore made another application before the Gujarat High Court which is No. 254 of 1960.2. In both these petitions the prayer is that the acquittal of opponent No. 1 under Section 408 Indian Penal Code should be set aside and he should be convicted. Session Judge agreed with the finding of the trying Magistrate that the accused was a partner of the co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1960Guj9; 1960CriLJ1330; (1960)GLR64
ORDER(1) This is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal, recommending that the order dated 18-7-59 passed by the First Class Magistrate, Gondal, in Criminal Case No. 190 of 1959 holding that he would not allow the prosecution to contradict the evidence given by its witness under the proviso to S. 162(1), Criminal Procedure Code 'without declaring him hostile and save in his cross-examination' be set aside, as it is wrong.(2) Section 137 of the Evidence Act provides that the examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called him examination-in-chief and the examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called him cross-examination. Section 142 of the Evidence Act provides; 'leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party be asked in an examination-in-chief, or in a re-examination, except with the permission of the Court'. Section 143 of the Evidence Act provides that leading questions may be asked in cross-examination. Sect...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1969Guj24; 1960CriLJ1447; (1960)GLR77
ORDER(1) This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, recommending that the conviction of one Raijibhai in Summary Case No. 1164 of 1959 tried by the III Joint Civil Judge, J. D., and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nadiad, under Section 69 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, and sentence of fine of Rs. 200/- in default rigorous imprisonment for 3 months should be set aside.(2) The prosecution case was that when the house of Raijibhai in the village of Dabhan was raided by the Head Constable of Nadiad Rural Police Station at about 7 A.M. on 9-7-1959 in the presence of two Panchas, 25 seers of Mhowra flowers in a gunny bag were found inside the house, and as he had no pass or permit for the possession of Mhowra flowers, he was prosecuted. At the trial, the evidence of the head constable was not supported by the two panchas both of whom were treated as hostile. According to the two Panchas, the Mhowra flowers were not found inside the house but outside the house of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1960Guj37; 1960CriLJ1585
ORDER(1) The applicant was convicted under S. 3(1) and S. 4(1) of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, which will be hereinafter referred to as the Act. The judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Junagath, was confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Junagadh, in appeal. Hence this revision application.(2) The prosecution case was that the Assistant Superintendent of Police sent a bogus punter Lalji by name to the house of the applicant with a five rupee currency note; that Lalji gave this currency note to the applicant who thereupon asked Lalji to select a girl for the purpose of prostitution. Lalji selected the wife of the applicant, Jaya alias Indumati by name, and both were allowed to go into a room. The police and Panchas then made a raid and found the punter in the company of Jaya in a compromising attitude on a cot. The five rupee currency note was found in the pocket of the applicant. The applicant was prosecuted. He denied that he was guilty, but...
Tag this Judgment!