Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1954(2)BLJR179; [1954]1SCR904
Venkatarama Ayyar, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave by Karnail Singh and Malkiat Singh against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab confirming their conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge of Ferozepore under section 302, Indian Penal Code, and the sentence of death passed on them. 2. The facts as found by the courts below are as follows : There had been long standing enmity between the appellants and their party on the one hand and the deceased Gurbaksh Singh and his party on the other, resulting in a number of crimes, and proceedings in court. On the 27th January, 1952, at about sunset time, Gurbaksh Singh was sitting inside his house on the sabbath and his sister Mst. Bholan was in the kitchen. Then the appellants and their men came to the place armed with rifles, got on the roof of the house of Gurbaksh Singh and challenged him to come out. Gurbaksh Singh and Mst. Bholan went to the kotha and bolted the door from inside. Then the appellants and their men made holes ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC245; 1954(2)BLJR183; (1954)IILLJ678SC; [1954]1SCR788
Mahajan, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by the State of Bihar against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby the High Court passed a decree for arrears of salary of the respondent against the State from the 30th July, 1940, up to the date of the institution of the suit. 2. The undisputed facts of the case are : That the respondent was appointed a Sub-Inspector of Police by the Inspector-General of Police, Bihar and Orissa, in January, 1920. In the year 1937 departmental proceedings were taken against him and he was found guilty of cowardice and of not preparing search lists and was punished by demotion for ten years. On appeal, the Deputy Inspector-General of Police held that the respondent was guilty of cowardice but acquitted him of the other charge. By an order dated the 23rd July, 1940, which was communicated to the respondent on the 29th of July, 1940, the Deputy Inspector-General of Police having found him guilty of cowardice made an order dismissing him from se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC229; 1954CriLJ712; [1954]1SCR933
Ghulam Hasan, J.1. This batch of appeals raises a common question of the Constitutional validity of section 7 of the Influx from Pakistan (Control) Act (XXIII of 1949). Section 3 of the same Act is also assailed on behalf of some of the appellants but for the purpose of deciding these appeals it will not be necessary to with the latter question. 2. Criminal Appeals Nos. 65 and 66 of 1952, which are directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in two petitions under article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus requiring the respondent not to remove them from India on the ground that the impugned section 7 is void may be treated as the leading case which will govern the other appeals. 3. The facts of each of these appeals are slightly different but they proceed upon the common assertion that the appellants are citizens of the Indian Republic. This fact was assumed in the leading case but it is not disputed that the statu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC706
Jagannadhadas J.1. These two appeals are against a judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dated the 8th May, 1953, and arise out of a trial before the Sessions Judge of Muzaffarnagar of the three appellants herein along with ten others in respect of charges under Section 148, and Sections 302 as well as 323 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge acquitted these ten persons of all the charges. But so far as the three appellants are concerned, though acquitted in respect of the charge under Section 302, I.P.C., they were convicted under Section 304(1) as well as under Section 323, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I.P.C.The appellants in Cr. A. 37 of 1953, Kripal and Bhopal, were sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100 and the appellant in Cr. A. 77 of 1953, Sheoraj, was sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100. The three appellants filed appeals to the High Court in respect of their convictions and sentences, while...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC700
Jagannadhas, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave. The appellant was a Police Jamadar working in the Local Investigation Branch, Mandvi, in the State of Kutch. The prosecution case against him is that he visited a place called Rampur within the Mandvi Taluka on the 16th April, 1950, and checked the pass-ports of a number of persons who had gone to Africa and returned. It is alleged that in the course of the check which he carried out, he collected the pass-port of one Ananda Ratna of the village and demanded a sum of Rs. 800/-for its return which was accordingly paid on the 18th April, 1950, and that thereby he committed an offence of extortion under Section 384, I. P. C.The prosecution against the appellant appears to have been the result of information filed by this very appellant on or about the 18th April, 1950, at the police station Mandvi that he was robbed of a sum of Rs. 870/- by some of the inhabitants of the village Rampur and that in course of the robbery he was assaulted...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC312; (1954)56BOMLR1180; 1954CriLJ881; [1954]1SCR976
Ghulam Hasan, J. 1. This appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Dixit and Chainani JJ.), dated June 26, 1950, whereby the High Court allowed the appeal of the State of Bombay, setting aside the order of acquittal of the appellant passed by the Sessions Judge of Kaira, dated May 7, 1949, and restoring the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nadiad Prant, dated December 31, 1948. 2. The appellant, Suleman Issa, who is an inhabitant of Natal in South Africa left Durban in August, 1947, by car for India to pay a visit to his native place Sarsa in Districe Kaira where his sister was living with her husband Alimahmad Issak. He was accompanied by Daud Hassam another brother-in-law and both traveled to Mombasa by car. From Mombasa they took a boat on August 30, and reached Colombo on September 11. They flew from Colombo to Madras on September 14, but shipped the car by a st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC282; 20(1954)CLT250(SC); [1954]1SCR1005
Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court, dated the 13th of December, 1951, by which the learned Judges allowed a petition, presented by the respondent under article 226 of the Constitution, and directed a writ of prohibition to issue in his favour prohibiting the appellant from proceeding with the settlement of a scheme in connection with a Math, known as the Shirur Math, of which the petitioner happens to be the head or superior. It may be stated at the outset that the petition was filed at a time when the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (Act II of 1927), was in force and the writ was prayed for against the Hindu Religious Endowment Board constituted under that Act, which was the predecessor in authority of the present appellant and had initiated proceedings for settlement of a scheme against the petitioner under section 61 of the said Act. 2. The petition was directed to be heard along with two other petitions of a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC375; 1954CriLJ993; (1954)IMLJ702(SC); [1954]1SCR1150
Mukherjea, J.1. This is a petition under article 32 of the Constitution, praying for a writ, in the nature of certiorari, for calling up the records of certain criminal proceedings stated against the petitioner by the Special Judge, Sessions Court, Delhi, and for quashing the same on the ground that these proceedings are without jurisdiction, having been commenced in violation of the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under article 20(2) of the Constitution.2. The petitioner was a member of the Indian Civil Service and till lately was employed as Secretary to the Ministry of Commerce and Industries in the Government of India. Certain imputations of misbehavior by the petitioner, while holding offices of various descriptions under the Government of India, came to the notice of the Central Government of and the latter being satisfied that there were prima facie good grounds for making an enquiry directed a formal and public enquiry to be made as to the truth or falsity of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC355; [1955]1SCR51
Mehr Chand Mahajan, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan, dated the 5th April, 1950, modifying the decree of the High Court of the former Jaipur State, dated the 3rd March, 1949, on an application for review in a second appeal concerning a suit for possession of property.2. The property in dispute originally belonged to one Ramchandra who died sonless in the year 1903. He was survived by his mother, Sheokori, his widow, Mst. Badni, and his two daughters, Bhuri and Laxmi. It is alleged that he made an oral will under which he bequeathed the property in dispute to his daughter, Laxmi. On the 6th September, 1906, Mst. Sheokori and Mst. Badni purporting to act in accordance with the directions of the oral will, executed and registered a deed of gift of the property in dispute in favour of Mst. Laxmi. The gift deed contains the following recitals :-'These houses are made a gift to you according to the will of your father, Ramchan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC349; (1955)57BOMLR10; [1955]1SCR108
Mahajan, J. 1. This appeal which comes by special leave obtained by the appellant Sadhu Singh, is from a decision of a Division Bench of the High Court of Patiala dated 2-6-1952 by which the sentence of transportation for life passed against him for the murder of one Harbachan Singh was affirmed.2. The facts are, that on 29-10-1949 Harbachan Singh, deceased, went to village Bihla because he intended to borrow a camel from Nand Singh, P. W. 4. P. Ws. Chand Singh and Amar Singh accompanied him to Bihla and the party reached there between 7 and 8 P.M. On arrival at Nand Singh's house it was found that he had gone to the house of Sadhu Singh. Nand Singh's son was asked to go to Sadhu Singh's house and call Nand Singh from there. Nand Singh's son returned with a message from his father inviting the party to Sadhu Singh's house. Accordingly they all went there and found Nand Singh in the midst of a liquor party. The appellant's father Harnam Singh was also there. It is said that on the arriv...
Tag this Judgment!