Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1950MP60; 1950CriLJ1352
ORDERKaul, C.J.1. Anant Bhaskar Lagu (who is-said to be a resident of Indore and Ujjain as he divides his time between the two please made the present application Under Section 491, Criminal P. 0, By a subsequent application it was prayed on his behalf that it might be treated as an application under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The material facts are as follows: On lab April 1949, the District Magistrate, Indore, passed an order under Madhya Bharat Maintenance of Public Order Act, samvat 2005, 3.3 (1) that Lagu be detained for a period of three months. It is-alleged that in enforcement of this order the petitioner waa arrested but he escaped from police custody. On 3rd December 1949, a constable saw him in Indore distributing some leaflets as part of propaganda for the communist party an association which was- declared unlawful in Indore. He was ultimately arrested in Indore on the night between 14th and 15th December 1949. On 15th December 1949, the District Magistrate Indore p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1952CriLJ887
Chaturvedi, J.1. This reference to the Full Bench arises from a Government appeal filed under Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Code against an order of the Sessions Judge, Dhar, acquitting the respondents of the charges under Sections 304, 392 and 302, Indian Penal Code. The respondents were convicted under Section 304, part 2 and an appeal filed by them against their conviction was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 5.12.1949. Rege J. delivering the judgment of the Division Bench concluded his judgment in para 11 in the following words:I would, therefore, maintain the conviction and dismiss the appeal. The learned Government Advocate made a strong plea for alteration of the conviction to one under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The Government has not filed an appeal from the acquittal under Section 302 although such an appeal would be within time, and in the circumstances, I would not think of altering the conviction though I agree, this Court has the power in a prope...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1951CriLJ1305
Kaul, C.J.1. This is an application purporting; to be made under Article 226 of the Constitution. The applicant Dayabhai Poonambhai Patel is a resident of Barwani. Prior to its integration with Madhya Bharat Barwani was an independent State governed by its Ruler styled His Highness the Maharana of Barwani. According to the applicant by an agreement dated 30-11-1947 His Highness the Maharana granted to him for the value of a consideration, a monopoly (sole right) for transport of passengers by motor buses within the State. One of the terms of the agreement was that no other buses or taxies except chose of the applicant would be allowed to ply on hire within (the State territory. That on 29-6-1948 the State of Barwani was merged in & became a part of the union of Madhya Bharat. This was effected in pursuance of a Covenant entered into on 22-4-1948 between the Ruler of Barwani & the Rulers of a number of other States in Central India This had the sanction of the then Govt. of India. The U...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1953CriLJ692
Radke, A.J.C.1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the appellants under Section 21, Bhopal Public Safety Act, and Sections 147, 332 and 333, Penal Code read with Section 149 of the Code, by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhopal, sentencing them to various terms of imprisonment, all of which are to run concurrently. One Pannalal, who has also been similarly convicted and sentenced, has filed a separate appeal No. 45 of 1951, and this judgment will decide his case also.2. The facts of the prosecution story are that the District Magistrate, Bhopal, had banned the holding of meetings and taking out of processions under Section 15, Bhopal Public Safety Act, and yet in contravention of the order passed by the District Magistrate, the three accused, along with others, took out a procession on 21.12.1948, and were about to hold a meeting. While they were prevented from taking out the procession from the railway station to the city, they stopped at the level crossing. As they used force and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
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
Reported in : 1957CriLJ189
Nevaskar, J.1. The only question involved In this appeal is whether the Prevention of Corruption Act No. II of 1947 was the law in force within the limits of Railway lands at Mandsaur during the period from November 1947 to May 1948.2. The facts material for the purpose of this appeal are as follows:Accused Mohanlal Motilal Paul, who was formerly employed as Sub-Permanent Way Inspector Western Railways Mandsaur was prosecuted along with one J. D. Bhatt for offences under Sections 6(2) read with Section 5 (1) (c) and (d) of Act No. II of 1947 referred to above and also under Section 420 read with Section 129(b) I.P.C. before the Special Judge Ratlam. After the preliminary inquiry Bhatt was discharged and a charge was framed against Mohanlal under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(c) and (d) of the aforesaid Act No. II of 1947.The trial then proceeded. Practically at the close of the trial by Notification No. 159(5) J. 480-4/ 52 dated 27-7-1953 published in the Madhya Bharat Government...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1957MP109; [1957]8STC429(MP)
Newaskar, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of certiorari and prohibition against Sales Tax Officer, Indore, and the State of Madhya Bharat submitted by the petitioner Mahabirprasad Durgaprasad Tamoli, Proprietor of Mahavir Cycle Stores, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Indore. 2. The petitioner owned a shop dealing in bicycle spare parts which he imports from outside the State for the purpose of sale within the State. The Sales Tax authorities found that the petitioner owns a 'pan shop' in Mhow. The petitioner's case in the petition with respect to this pan shop is that the said shop is 'looked after' by his son Babulal who is separate from him for the last 10 years and that the entire income of the said shop which is situated at Mhow, is received by Babulal who lived and messed separately from him. The Sales Tax authorities held the petitioner liable for Sales Tax in respect of his turnover of imported bicycle spare parts for the assessment yea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1957MP171
1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the order of Kotval J., in Miscellaneous Petition No. 466 of 1955.2. The appellant used to carry on business in the State of Nandgaon and did so during the years 1946-47, 1947-48 and 1948-49. At that time, the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were applicable to the Nandgaon State on account of the extension of that Act to the State in the year 1942. The appellant was assessed to income-tax for the above years under the said act by three separate orders of the Income-tax Officer, dated respectively 29-12-1947, 9-1-1948 and 29-3-1949, and the tax was duly realised by the State authorities.The State merged with Madhya Pradesh with effect from ]st August 1949 by the State Merger (Governors' Provinces) Order, 1849, end by the Taxation Laws (Extension to Merged States and Amendment) Act 1949 (hereinafter referred to in the judgment as the Taxation Laws Act) the Indian Income-tax Act was extended to the State of Nandgaon with effect fro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1958MP33; 1958CriLJ181
Samvatsar, J.1. This revision application is filed by accused Haji Usman who has been convicted of anoffence under Section 46 (a) of the Ayat Niryat Kar Vidhan, Samvat 2006 read with Madhya Bharat Government Notification No. 7 dated 14th August, 1948 and sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. The facts giving rise to this petition are briefly stated as follows :2. On 2-11-1950 the petitioner despatched from his shop at Dewas 309 tins of groundnut seed oil for being exported to the then Bhopal State. The truck in which these tins were being carried was checked a little aheadof Daulatpur Custom Post in the territory of Madhya Bharat and as export of this oil from Madhya Bharat was then prohibited, the tins were seized and the accused-petitioner was prosecuted before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate First Class, Sonkatch.3. The accused denied having committed any offence but the learned Magistrate found Mm guilty and sentenced him to suffer ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1958MP21
Samvatsar, J.1. This is defendants' first appeal and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs-respondents in the Court of the Civil Judge, First Class, Guna, to recover from them a sum of Rs. 8,000/-, The plaintiff's case as laid out in the plaint is that the defendants who are members of a joint Hindu family and carry on business in the name of Mansukhdas Khemchand, had from time to time borrowed various sums of money from the plaintiffs; that an account of these dealings, was made on 28-5-1939 when a sum of Rs. 8,000/- was found due to the plaintiffs; that the defendant No. 1, who was then the manager of the business and Karta of the joint family admitted the correctness of the balance and affixed his signature to the debit entry in plaintiffs' Bahi.It is then alleged in the plaint that on 25-4-1942 the defendant No. 3 borrowed a further sum of Rs. 125/- and signed the debit entry in the plaintiff's Bahi acknowledging receipt of this loan that on 27-5-1945 defendant No. 3 appro...
Tag this Judgment!