Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2004(1)ALD(Cri)918; 2004CriLJ3266
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the Judgment dated 18-4-2000 in Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1997 on the file of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, wherein the conviction recorded under Section 7 read with 8(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 and sentence imposed against the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of forty days by the trial Court i.e. Court of Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise), Guntur in C. C. No. 12 of 1996, dated 30-6-1997 was confirmed.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under :On 30-3-1995, P. W. 2 the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Prohibition and Excise, Tenali along with P.W. 3 the constable of the department and other staff found the accused near R.T.C. bus stand, Tenali loitering in suspicious circumstances. The accused was apprehended. The a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2002(5)WLC240; 2002(2)WLN89
Garg, J. 1. This revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the judgment dated 25.4.88, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisingh Nagar by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment and order dated 25,4.84 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rai Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No. 476/80 whereby the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magislrate convicted the accused petitioner for offence under Section 408 I.P.C. and sentenced him as under:-OFFENCE UNDER SECTIONSENTENCE AWARDED408 I.P.C.18 Months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 4000/- indefault to further undergo 9 months R.I.2. It arises in the following circumstances:(i) On 22.3.78, P.W. 9 V.V. Dixit Executive Officer, Sri Ganganagar Central Sahkari Bank Ltd. Lodged a written report Ex.P/12 before Police Station Gajsinghpur to the effect that in the year 1974-75 and from 1.7.75 to 19.4.76, special audit was done by P.W. 7 K.N. Joshi and it was found that the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 23(1983)DLT484
G.C. Jain, J.(1) On June 10, 1976, at about 5.30 p.m., the petitioner, Nand Lal, was driving a D.T.C. bus, bearing registration number Dhp 2367. A two-wheeler scooter, No. Dls 8292, was going ahead of the bus. On reaching Safdarjung Crossing, the scooter as well as the bus took a turn towards their left. After covering a distance of five or (r)cven yards from the crossing the bus hit the scooter from behind. The driver as well as the pillion rider of the scooter fell on the road and were crushed under the front left wheel of the bus. One of them died on the spot and the other died in the Safdarjung Hospital the same night. The occurrence took place due to rash and negligent driving of the petitioner. (2) The petitioner was tried for offences under Sections 279 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, vide order dated January 14, 1981. He was awarded rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500/. and in default to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2607; 1973CriLJ49; (1972)2SCC637; [1973]1SCR923; 1973(5)LC356(SC)
J.M. Shelat, J.1. In March 1967, the appellant was an employee in a sweetmeat shop, known as Bengal Sweet Shop being shop No. 6, Sector II, in Ramakrishna Puram, New Delhi. The shop was owned by one Budh Ram and one A.K. Bhattacharya.2. On March 1.5, 1967, wit. F. Dean, a Food Inspector in the employment of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, went to the said shop and purchased 'patisa' which were sold to him by the appellant. These were sold to him from a lot exposed for sale. The Food Inspector then divided the patisa into three portions and packed each of them into sealed bottles, one of which was handed over by him to the appellant.3. On an analysis of the sample by the Public Analyst appointed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, XXXVII of 1954 it was found that the patisa were prepared with unpermitted coal tar dye, and therefore, were adulterated food stuff. A complaint to that effect was filed before the Magistrate, 1st Class, Delhi, who, after recording evidence, fou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1995(II)OLR1
R.K. Dash, J.1. The accused, appellant herein, faced trial in G.R. Case No. 449 of 1983, under Sections 323 and 324, IPC. Upon hearing, the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Chatrapur, found him guilty under both the sections and consequently convicted and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months, for the offence under Section 323, IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 324, IPC. On appeal, the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has come up to this Court by filing the present revision. 2. Shortly stated; the prosecution case is that on 11-8-1983 at about 7 a.m. informant Jura Mohanty (PW 1) had been to irrigate his land which adjoins the land of the accused. Seeing him, the accused who was present there, hurled abuses at him in filthy language, asking as to why he opened the water...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1997)11SCC571
A.M. Ahmadi, C.J. and; Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. Special leave granted.2. Despite service of notice, the respondent has not chosen to enter an appearance. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The only ground on which the decision of the learned Single Judge came to be altered by the Division Bench is based on the interpretation of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, which reads as under:“12. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a person found guilty of an offence and dealt with under the provisions of Section 3 or Section 4 shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law:”The Division Bench of the High Court held that this provision has overriding effect over the provisions of any other law and, therefore, the order of dismissal was liable to be quashed on that ground alone.3. The impugned order was passed on the basis of Section 12 of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1976)17GLR92
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. Two questions of great importance stare us in the eyes. Should a smuggler be released on probation merely because she is a widow or a poor agent of the principal offender.? If yes, will the principal offenders not get a licence to indulge in smuggling albeit provided they employ widows, women or poor agents?2. A woman carrier of smuggled gold pleaded, guilty to the charge for an offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 and under Section 85 of the gold (control) Act, 1968 and was convicted for the commission of the said offence but was ordered to be released on probation of good conduct on her entering into a bond of Rs. 1,000/- with one surety for a period of one year to appear and undergo sentence if and when called upon to do so during the aforesaid period. The Assistant Collector of Customs has thereupon invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer that the, aforesaid order releasing her on probation be quashed and she be sentenced t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Katakey, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 22-6-1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,' Belonia, South Tripura in ' Criminal Appeal No. 11(1) of 1999 dismissing the appeal filed by the revision petitioner by upholding the judgment of conviction dated 18-1-1999 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Belonia, South Tripura in G.R. Case No. 340 of 1996 convicting the revision petitioner under Section 325, IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and directing payment of compensation of Rs. 25,000/- in the light of Section 357 of Cr.P.C. to the victim Ratari Baidya, for the loss of his right hand.2. A criminal proceeding was set in motion pursuant to the first information lodged by Durgacharan Baidya, P.W. 4, father of the injured Ratan Baidya, P.W. 1, alleging that on 25-11-1996 at about 17.30 hours while Ratan Baidya, injured, on way to Belonia town, he had an altercation with the revision...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1972CriLJ406
ORDERM.S. Nesargi, J.1. This petition is directed against the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner by the Addl. First Class Magistrate, Manealore in C. C. No. 2239 of 1967. convicting the petitioner for offence under Section 111 (d) read with Section 135 of the Customs Act. 1962 (hereinafter referred to in the course of this order as 'the Act') and Rule 126-P (2) (ii) of the Defence of India (Amendment) Rules 1963. dealing with gold control (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules' in the course of this order), and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on each of the counts, and confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1969 by the Sessions Judge. South Kanara.2. The prosecution case is that at about 12.30 p. m. on 11-1-1965. P. W.1 Nagaraj, a Sub-Inspector in Central Excise Department and working as such in Customs Special Preventive Branch at Mangalore. was on patrol duty at Hampanakatta bus stand in Mangalore town. He observed the petitioner Setting d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1975(8)WLN994
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated July 28, 1971 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk whereby he convicted the accused appellant Gopal udder Section 363 I.P.C., and sentenced him to one months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in defult of the payment of which to undergo imprisonment for a further period of two weeks.2. The prosecution story as disclosed at the trial is that on the date of the occurrence Rameshwar, a boy of about ten years age was living with Ridheyshyam, his maternal uncles who was Head-Master of the School at Chhang. On October 20, 1967 Gopal accused went to Radhey Shyam and requested him to send Rameshwar with him to be taken to Deoli to attend a feast. He further represented that Rameshwar's father lad asked the former to fetch toe boy and had paid Rs. 2/- bus-fare of the child. Balieving this representation to be true Radheyshyam asked Rameshswar to accompany the accused appellant Gopal. Later on it was...
Tag this Judgment!