Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-16-1954
Reported in : 1954CriLJ872
Dixit, J.1. The appellant Randhira has been convicted by the Special Judge of Gwalior appointed under Section 6, Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 of an offence under Section 165A, Penal Code and sentenced to four months rigorous imprisonment. The accused has appealed both against the conviction and sentence.2. The facts of this case are very brief. It was alleged by the prosecution that a miscellaneous case, to which Randhira was a party, was pending before Mr. Joshi Naib Tehsildar of Picchore; that on 16-1-1950 when Mr. Joshi came out of his house and was proceeding to the court, the appellant Randhira offered him two currency notes of ten rupees each and asked him to dispose of his case. Mr. Joshi at once made a report to the police against the appellant. The appellant admitted the recovery of two currency notes of Rs. 10/- each from his possession. He also admitted that he had offered the notes to Mr. Joshi. He, however, said that he intended to give the notes to Mr, Joshi as fees f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-05-1954
Reported in : 1954CriLJ1739
A.H. Khan, J.1. The Sessions Judge of Indore has made a reference to the High Court in this case and also in 15 other cases; the points involved in all these cases are questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India. The questions being Identical, all the references are being disposed of by this single order.2. The facts, leading to the reference, briefly stated are that the Criminal Law Amendment Act (Act No, XLVI of 1952) received the assent of the President on 28-7-1952. tinder Section 7 of the Act, the learned Sessions Judge of Indore was appointed a Special Judge on 8-10-1952 by the Madhya Bharat Government. All cases triable by the Special Judge, that were pending before other Courts, were transferred to the Special Judge under Section 10 of the Act for disposal.During the hearing of these transferred cases, the counsel of the accused raised some objections relating to the validity of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952, and, hence this reference.The obj...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-16-1954
Reported in : 1955CriLJ157
ORDERSathaye J.C.(1) This is a reference Under Section 432(1), Cr.PC from the Subordinate Judge-Magistrate, 1st class, Bhopal. The question referred is: 'Whether the Bhopal Cattle Slaughter (Restrictions) Ordinance, 1949, is 'intra vires' of the Chief Commissioner, Bhopal?'(2) The question arose in a trial of four persons, the non-applicants, for an offence Under Section 10 of the Ordinance. The learned Magistrate is of the view that it is not 'intra vires' of the Chief Commissioner inasmuch as there is nothing in the Ordinance to indicate (a) that it was necessitated by any emergency, and (b) that it was made and promulgated for the peace and good Government of the Bhopal State or part thereof, as required Under Section 12, Bhopal Legislative Council Act, 1922, as amended by such Act (No. I of 1940), under which it was made and promulgated by the Chief Commissioner.(3) The Bhopal Cattle Slaughter (Restrictions) Ordinance, 1949, was promulgated by the Chief Commissioner, Bhopal, on 13-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-08-1954
Reported in : 1955CriLJ959
ORDERA.H. Khan, J.1. This reference has been made by the learned Sessions Judge, Indore, recommending that the charge framed by the Additional City Magistrate, Indore, against Fateh Chand Under Section 8, Madhya Bharat Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act (Act 3 of 1948), read with Clause 16(1), Cotton Textile (Control) Order of 1948 be quashed. The offence is alleged to have been committed between 7-12-1948 and 21-1-1949, when the Madhya Bharat Act No. 3 of 1948 was in force. This Act was repealed on 17-8-1950 by Section 17(4) of the Central Act known as the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act (24 of 1946) as extending to Part B States by the amending Act No. 52 of 1950.2. The main grounds upon which the reference is based are:1. that on the repeal of the Madhya Bharat Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act 1948 by the Central Act referred to above, prosecutions pending under the Madhya Bharat Act and not concluded before 17-8-1950 could not be continued, since the repea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-29-1954
Reported in : 1955CriLJ1559
ORDERSathaye, J.C.1. The applicant is convicted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Goharganj, of an offence Under Section 409, 1. P. C, and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. His appeal was dismissed.2. The case for the prosecution was that the applicant was a Forest Guard at village Dungaria Tehsil Goharganj and in his such capacity recovered Rs. 15/8/- on 15-3-1950 from one Kashiram Contractor for 'Mahua and Achar' and passed a receipt therefor. He, however, never credited the amount either at the Range Office or with the Treasury and dishonestly appropriated it to himself. Tie was prosecuted for an offence Under Section 409, IPC In defence he denied having ever received the amount from Kashiram though he admitted his signature on the receipt. His explanation is that lie had signed the document in token of his check of the 'ravanna' on the reverse of ...
Tag this Judgment!