Court : Guwahati
lodge, c.j.1. this rule was issued under the pro-visions of 8. 491, criminal p. 0. at the instance of a number of persons detained in the district jail at jorhat. the material facts are these:2. the petitioners were arrested on 22nd may 1948 and placed in custody. on 6th june 1948, the deputy commissioner, under the provisions of 8. 2 (2). maintenance of public order act, 1947, directed that they be detained for a period of two months. on july 20th, the government of assam passed an order directing that the period of detention be extended. towards the end of july, this court delivered judgment in the case of chyne v. the government of assam, and held that the government had no power to extend the period of detention in such a manner. there, after on 9th august 1948 the present petitioners moved this court contending that their further detention under the orders of government, dated 20th july 1948, was illegal. a rule was accordingly issued on the chief secretary to the government of assam and on the superintendent of jorhat jail to show cause why the petitioners should not be set at liberty.3. on 14th august 1948, a letter was address-ed to the deputy commissioner of sibsagar by the chief secretary to the government of assam, directing that in view of the high court ruling, the petitioners be released from custody. but with the same letter, fresh orders by the governor of assam under section 2 (l) (a), assam maintenance of public order act, 1917, were forwarded to the deputy .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
thadani, c.j.1. this is an appeal made by the government advocate of assam on behalf of the province of assam under section 417, criminal p. c, in a ease in which 9 accused persons, viz., (l) lakhikanta medhi, (a) bahiram medhi, (3) subharam das, (4) hargovinda medhi, (6) khili-ram medhi, (6) hansaram medhi, (7) naroram medhi, (8) bapuram medhi, and (9) panimal medhi, were tried by the learned assistant sessions judge, assam valley districts, with the aid of a jury. at the conclusion of the trial, the jury brought a verdict of acquittal and the learned judge, agreeing with the unanimous verdict of the jury, acquitted the accused. the present appeal has been brought against the acquittal of these accused persons.2. the grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal ate these : l) that the learned sessions judge misdirected the jury in not marshalling the facts and law in an intelligible way enabling the jury to come to a just verdict. (2) that the learned judge should have placed the evidence against each of the accused in respect of each charge framed against him, by omitting to do so, the learned judge left the jury in a confused mass of evidence compelling them to give a verdict of benefit of doubt. this omission amounts to a misdirection. (3) that the learned judge misdirected the jury by placing before them a defence story which was not set up by any of the accused. (4) that the occurrence took place in an open field and broad day light and as many as u eye-witnesses proved .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... when the opium was seized, the woman stated that it had been given to her by a man who had persuaded her to take it with her to sarupathar on payment of rsection 10. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
thadani, c.j.1. this is an appeal from jail preferred by one muklesur rahman and habibur rahman who were convicted by the learned sessions judge, a. l, d., under section 801, part ii, read with b. si, penal code, upon a trial held with the aid of a jury. agreeing with the unanimous verdict of the jury, the learned judge found the two accused guilty and sentenced the accused mukleaur rahman to rigorous imprisonment for five years, and habibur rahman to rigorous imprisonment for four years, under section 804, part ii, read with section 34, penal code.2. we admitted the appeal to hearing is order to satisfy ourselves whether section 84, penal code, was applicable in point of law to a case when the accused persons are convicted and sentenced under section 304, part n read with section 34 penal code.3. the question of common intention is a question of fact, which was properly dealt with by the learned sessions judge in his summing up to the jury, and we, therefore, accept toe existence of a common intention within the meaning of section 34, penal code, as a fact, which undoubtedly was a matter for the jury alone to decide,4. the question whether in point of law, section 34, penal code, applies to a case when accused persons are charged with and found guilty under section 804, part ii, penal code, came up before a division bench of the calcutta high court in ibra ahanda v. emperor a. i. r. (31) 1944 cal. 339 : 45 cr. l. j. 771, lodge and das jj. differed, ehundkar j., agreed with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
thadani, c.j.1. this is a revision application under the provisions of section 439, criminal p.c. directed against an order passed by the magistrate, first class, golaghat, dated 8th october 1948, by which in addition to ordering confication of cloths, yarn and sugar, in respect of which offences under section 7 of act xxiv [34] of 1946 (central) were committed, he confiscated to government the truck which was used in the commission of the offence.2. it is contended on behalf of the applicant that the order passed by the learned magistrate purporting to be an order under the provisions -of section 517, criminal p.c., was in reality, an order passed in pursuance of section 7 of act xxiv [31] 1946, which is in these terms:7. (1) it nay person contravenes any order made under section 3, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both, and if the order so provides, any court trying such contravention may direct that any property in respect of which the qowt is satisfied that the order has been contravened, shall be forfeited to his majesty:it is plain from the language of section 7 that the order of forfeiture must be directed against any property in respect of which the court is satisfied that the order has been contravened, the property in respect of which the order has been contravened, consists of cloths, yarn and sugar, the vehicle in which these articles were carried, ib not one of the items of property in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... the accused appears to be a normal man capable of understanding the gravity of the offence committed by him and the normal legal consequences thereof. ..... it has been stated by the convict in his written statement that the deceased was an old man of 75 & his wife nur chehara p.w. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... therefore must stand dismissed.it appears that the learned sessions judge has dealt with the appellant too leniently in inflicting the punishment of transportation for life, in a case of such brutal and inhuman murder of an old man in his sleep. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... he thus relied for his finding on the evidence of witnesses other than mitharam, whom he described as an old man and who probably was confused and could not correctly state where he saw the torch.22. ..... he has referred to the second man but has not given the name.20. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... a man cannot be said to do an act or be guilty of an offence at a particular place where he is not at the time of the offence as held by mackney j. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
lakshmi narain, addl. j.c.1. this revision petition in the form of a second appeal has been filed by the petitioner promode chandra dey, against the rejection of his appeal on 18.5.58 t.e. by their lordships of the high court of judicature at tripura. the appeal was filed against his conviction and sentence of r.i. for life under section 302/34 penal code passed by the sessions judge of agartala on 10.2.58 t.e.2. an objection was raised by the government advocate that this petition was not entertainable by this court on the ground that the judicial committee of the privy council to which the petition laid and filed then, has already been abolished. on 6.3.50 the hon'ble judicial commissioner for tripura passed the order on this petition as follows:this has now been taken up by this court with the corresponding jurisdiction.and ordered it to be registered.3. the petition was filed in the judicial committee on 16.8.58 t.e. that committee was abolished on 25.1.1950 a. d. section 43 of the tripura (courts) order reads as follows:43. pending proceedings: (1) any proceeding-pending in a court immediately before the commencement of this order shall, upon the commencement of this order, be deemed to be transferred to the court exercising the jurisdiction under this order which corresponds as far as may be, to the jurisdiction of the court in which the proceeding was pending, and the court to which the proceeding is transferred shall proceed to try, hear and determine the matter as .....
Tag this Judgment!