Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2008(2)CHN530
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above writ petition and the appeal being MAT No. 52/04 with FMA No. 1713/03 are heard together as the principal point of controversy involved in those matters are interlinked with each other.2. The writ petition being W.P. No. 2153 (W) of 2003 has been filed by one Kiran Subba and three others claiming for the following reliefs:(a) Writ/Writ in the nature of Mandamus be issued thereby declaring that the Nepali/Gorkha speaking people of hill areas of Darjeeling are linguistic minorities;(b) Writ/Writ in the nature of mandamus be issued thereby declaring that the Schools/institution in the hill areas of Darjeeling are established and administered by the linguistic minorities and as such the provisions of West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997; and the amendments there under are not applicable in the hill areas of Darjeeling;(c) Writ/Writ in the nature of mandamus be issued thereby restraining the 'concerned respondent authorities from imposing the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 47Ind.Cas.811
1.The accused Kabili Katoni has been found guilty by the unanimous verdict of the Jury of the murder of one Mangal Singh and has been sentenced to death by the Sessions Judge of the Assam Valley District. The case has come before us under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and there is also an appeal by the accused to this Court.2. It was argued that there had been such a misdirection by the learned Sessions Judge as vitiated the verdict of the Jury and that the accused was entitled to a new trial. The passage relied upon was that where the learned Judge was dealing with the burden which lay upon either side to prove such facts as they asserted. In this case' (he said) 'it is for Kabili to satisfy the Jury that he was ill treated by the Police or that inducements were offered,' On 12th September 1917, Kabili had made a detailed confession before a Magistrate. To that confession he adhered, with some slight differences and additions, before the Commit-ting Magistrate on 27th Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1997CriLJ2886
Nure Alam Chowdhury, J.1. This appeal by accused-appellant Ravi Magor (alias-Rabi Bahadur, alias -- Rabi Bahadur Magor) is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dt. 13-10-93 passed by the 14. Addl. Sessions Judge, 14th Court, Alipore, South 24 pgs., in Sessions Trial Nos. 5(7) of 1992, convicting the appellant for an offence under Section.392/397 1 .P.C. and sentencing him to suffer R. 1. for eight years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- i.d., to suffer R.I. for a further period of 4 months and also convicting him for an offence under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- i.d., to suffer R.I. for a further period of 2 months, both the substantive sentences of imprisonment to run concurrently.2. In the Trial Court, the present appellant and two others were charged for an offence under Section 392 read with Section. 397 of the IPC. An additional charge for an offence under Section 25(1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1934Cal273
Lort Williams, J.1. The appellants were charged with offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 147/109, Penal Code. They were tried with two other accused by the Additional Sessions Judge at Alipore and a jury. Ram Sumer Ahir alias Matabadal was convicted of offences under Sections 148 and 323, and sentenced to imprisonment for two years and one year respectively, to run consecutively; the other appellants were convicted under Section 147 and sentenced each to imprisonment for two years, and the other two accused were acquitted.2. The case for the prosecution was, that the complainant Mr. J. Choudhury, who is a member of the English Bar, an Advocate of the Calcutta High Court, Editor of the Calcutta Weekly Notes and a respected citizen of Calcutta, is the owner of certain property called Nos. 1, 2 and 3 Sarba Mangala, Hat Lane. He obtained a civil Court decree for ejectment and vacant possession against one Ram Gopal, and on 3rd July 1932 the Nazir having obtained specific instructions...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1992(58)ELT192(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Roy, J.1. This is an application by Manindra Chandra Dey, the writ petitioner, complaining against an imposition of a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- upon him made by the customs authorities. The imposition was made by an order of the Collector dated 21-4-1986, under item (c) thereof and the same was confirmed in appeal by the Tribunal in its appellate order dated 21-11-1989. A reference application therefrom was dismissed by the Tribunal as out of time.2. As the result of the same events two other consequences also followed. The first of these was that Manindra Chandra Dey was also proceeded against under the Gold Control Act (now repealed) and the second consequence was that two gold bars and one gold stick were confiscated. In so far as the gold control proceedings are concerned they form the subject-matter of altogether different legal proceeding and whatever appears herein is not to be treated as any pronouncement upon the same. In so far as the confiscation of the gold bars and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1997(57)ECC93,1997(89)ELT478(Cal)
1. On 20th April, 1985 the appellants say some of their Officers found the Respondent No. 1 in possession of two gold bars and one gold stick as well as some old and broken gold ornaments. The Respondent No. 1 is a dealer in gold ornaments. The recovery was alleged to have been made upon search of the person and the bag in the possession of the Respondent No. 1 at the business premises of one Prakash Yadav. The said Officers took the Respondent No. 1 to the Customs House where a confessional statement was made by the Respondent No. 1.2. In the statement the Respondent No. 1 had first set out particulars of his family and himself as well as his business. The relevant extracts of the confessional statement are:'All the officers (affairs ?) of the shop are being locked after by myself only. Beside the shop I personally sometimes purchase and sell small amount of gold which I purchased from different broker and sell to different person on premium. Actually at present with the showroom in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1966Cal217,1966CriLJ530
Sen, J. 1. These two revision cases have been taken up together as they arise out of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge of 24-Parganas, Shri T.K. Mutsuddi passed on 21st January 1965, in the criminal revision case No. 83 of 1966 Saday Chand Mahtab is the petitioner. He has come up before this Court for quashing the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby he was committed to the Court of Session for standing his trial under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged murder of Aroo Lama. 2. The facts on which the present applications have arisen may be stated briefly as follows : In January 1960, Maharajadhiraj Bahadur Uday Chand Mahtab of Burdwan made a gift of a portion of premises No. 10, Diamond Harbour Road with buildings thereon to his staff officer Nima Ongal Lapecha of Darjeeling. It was alleged on behalf of the prosecution that his son, the present petitioner did not take the gift in good grace. It transpired subsequently in Novemb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1960Cal142,1960CriLJ329
ORDERN.K. Sen, J. 1. This Rule is directed against an order of acquittal passed by Shri P. N. Lahiri, Additional Sessions Judge, 24 Parganas, in a Sessions trial where the jury unanimously found the three opposite parties not guilty of the respective charges upon which they were tried. The learned Judge held that the verdict which he accepted was not against the weight of evidence. He did not, however, express himself as to whether he agreed with the verdict. 2. Opposite party No. 1 Shibraj Singh was tried on charges under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge under Section 302 was for shooting Sk. Monjur to death and the other charge under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code was for causing grievous hurt to a boy named Ranjit Pal, who is prosecution witness No. 24 in the case. The two other opposite parties were charged for abetment of the aforesaid offences. 3. The prosecution case which may be shortly narrated was as follows: There is a manufacturing concern on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 18Ind.Cas.149
Carnduff, J.1. Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 provides that, whenever a Sub-Divisional Magistrate receives information that a person within the local limits of his jurisdiction is in the habit of committing such offences as theft, robbery, extortion, breach of the peace and so forth, or is so desperate and dangerous as to render his being at large without security hazardous to the community, he may require him to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for his good behaviour; and Section 117, Sub-section (3), enacts that the fact that a person is such a habitual offender as aforesaid may be proved by evidence of general repute or otherwise.2. Under these provisions, the petitioner, who is an Honorary Magistrate of twenty years' standing and a zemindar of good family and position residing in the Supaul Sub-Division of the Bhagalpur District, was, on the 18th May last, called upon to show cause by Babu Satis Chandra Mukerjee, the Sub-Divisional Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1973Cal425,77CWN535
A.K. Sinha, J. 1. These two appeals are preferred by the husband against the judgment and decree of the trial Court refusing restitution of conjugal rights, and allowing the wife a child's custody briefly, in the following circumstances.The petitioner-husband, who is the present appellant, made an application for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent No. 1, Dulari Bai. His case, briefly, is that he married the respondent No. 1 according to Hindu rites in the month of February, 1955 at a place known as Terhiparha within P. S. Kharagpur, District Midnaporc. After their marriage they continued to live as husband and wife when a daughter was born who, however, subsequently died. Thereafter, another daughter Sukundraj and a son Kishen Singh were born out of their wedlock. Although, they lived happily for a number of years as husband and wife, the respondent No. 2, the mother of respondent No. 1, a woman of questionable character in conspiracy and collusion with others forcib...
Tag this Judgment!