Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1877)ILR1Bom132
Green, J.1. Though the plaint, as originally framed, does (amongst other things) allege that the passing of resolutions reflecting on the character of private individuals is ultra vires the defendants as Trustees of the Port of Bombay, yet the scope and gist of the case there made is, that the defendants had by their said resolutions defamed the plaintiff, though such defamatory matter is not alleged to have been as yet published, and the relief sought is for damages, and in the meantime and till the hearing for an injunction against publishing such resolutions, and in particular transmitting the same to the local Government. On the same day as the original plaint was filed, viz., the 2nd instant, a rule was granted calling on the defendants to show cause why the president or presidents of the meetings of the 10th and 17th February, in the plaint mentioned, should not be restrained by injunction from signing the resolutions in question, or either of them, and why the said defendants, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1877)ILR1Bom477
Green, J.1. The first issue raises the question whether the words used in the resolution of 10th February, and in effect reiterated in that of 17th February, amount to a libel, i.e., apart from the question whether there be foundation in fact for so using such words, and apart from the question of the occasion and circumstances of publication, whether it is, in law, a libel to write and publish of another, and in particular of a contractor for the conveyance by steamers of goods and passengers, 'Mr. Shepherd's offer of Rs. 520 in full of all claims should be accepted, but any further transactions with him should be avoided, if possible.' I cannot doubt that it is. No doubt, when the whole turn of the phrase in question, in the present case, is considered, taking it in connection with the introductory part of the resolution (which also was published), it may not be a libel of the more serious character. But I am of opinion that such words, even taking them in connection with what preced...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1877)ILR1Bom610
Melvill, J.1. In this case fourteen persons were tried in the Sessions Court of Thana for being concerned in the fraudulent cutting and removal of wood from the Government forests in Alibagh. They were all acquitted with the exception of the first accused, Hanmanta, who was convicted on two out of twenty-seven heads of charge. Against this conviction Hanmanta has appealed. On the other hand the Government of Bombay has appealed against the acquittal of Hanmanta on the other charges, and against the acquittal of twelve out of the remaining thirteen accused persons on all the charges. The appeal against Appaji, No. 14, was withdrawn at the commencement of the hearing, it being admitted that the evidence against him was insufficient for conviction. The Government of Bombay succeeded in serving a notice of the appeal on only six out of the remaining accused persons: and, therefore, it is only as against those six persons that we have been able to hear the appeal.2. At a very early stage of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1878)ILR2Bom148
Michael Westropp, C.J.1. On the 1st of May 1876 a warrant of arrest, under Section 201 of the old Civil Procedure Code (Act VIII of 1859), was issued against Ratansi Kalianji pursuant to a Judge's order of the 29th April 1876, upon an application for execution of a decree of the 27th April 1876. Ratansi Kalianji was arrested upon the 30th of October 1876, was brought before a Judge in Chamber on the 31st October 1876, and then finally committed by the Judge, 'until he (Ratansi Kalianji) satisfy the amount of the decree passed against (him) the said Ratansi Kalianji in the above suit.' Then followed in the same order the usual direction, under Section 278 of Act VIII of 1859, that the plaintiffs should pay to him subsistence allowance at the rate of 4 annas per diem, by monthly payments in advance. The receipts indorsed on the Judge's order by Mr. Lake, for the superintendent of the gaol, and by the sheriff, and the certificate of the latter, show that the detention of the prisoner Rata...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1885)ILR9Bom288
Charles Sargent, C.J.1. The question before us is whether the Judge now presiding at the Criminal Sessions of the High Court can proceed with the trial of the two prisoners who have been committed to this Court by the Magistrate at Secunderabad. One of the prisoners is admittedly a European British subject and a public servant, and it is not denied that the provisions 'of Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (X of 1882) would apply to his case., By that section it is enacted that when a public servant is accused as such public servant of any offence, no Court shall take cognizance of such offence without the previous sanction of the Government. Now, it appears that the magisterial inquiry before Colonel Dobbs was held without such sanction having been previously obtained. That inquiry terminated in the committal of the prisoners for trial on the 27th September. The sanction of the Government, which has been put in evidence, is dated the 12th November, nearly two months subsequent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1888)ILR12Bom377
Birdwood, J.1. The Magistrate has found, on the evidence in this case, that the complainant, a Bhatia cloth-broker and shopkeeper, was stopped and questioned by the accused, a constable of the Bombay police force, regarding three pieces of cloth that he was carrying; that an altercation occurred between them; that the complainant was ultimately arrested and marched off in ignominy through the streets, first to the Girgaum Police station and then to Dhobi Talav, and that he was in police custody for upwards of four hours before he was finally discharged by Inspector Saunders without any recognizance being taken or charge framed against him. In his examination before the Magistrate, the accused said that he had taken the complainant into custody because he had assaulted him. The complainant denied that he had struck the accused, but admitted that he had a scuffle with him and that his hand might have gone against the body of the accused. It was contended for the accused, in the Court bel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1889)ILR13Bom506
Jardine, J.1. This is an appeal directed by the Government of Bombay under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedures from an appellate order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge of Thana, reversing the convictions and sentences passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge for offences punishable under Section 182, and Section 182 with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge did not enter into the merits; but, assuming the facts to be as found by the Assistant Sessions Judge, held, on the authority of In the matter of the petition of Golam Ahmed Kazi I.L.R. Cal. 314 and The Queen v. Periannan I.L.R. Mad. 241 that they did not constitute any offence.2. The Public Prosecutor has argued for the Crown that Section 182 has been wrongly construed, and that this section applies to the facts, and that they also constitute the offence of cheating by personation as defined in Section 416 of the Indian Penal Code. In Golam Ahmed Kazi's case I.L.R. Cal. At pp. 315 the learned J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1889)ILR13Bom600
Scott, J.1. This was a complaint lodged in the District Magistrate's Court, at Poona, by one Ganesh Sathe against certain subordinate officials who had given evidence in the case of Empress v. Hammantrao and the complaint was grounded on the evidence given by them, the record of which was in the archives of the Magistrate's own Court. The complaint was dismissed by the District Magistrate, but the dismissal of the complaint was set aside by a Full Bench of the High Court. The High Court remanded the case for investigation, on the ground that the Magistrate had erred in allowing his decision to be influenced by consideration of the motives of the complainant. He ought, the Court said, to have confined himself to the consideration whether there was prime facie evidence of a criminal offence. The complaint on remand, came before another Magistrate and was again dismissed. The papers were once more sent for by the High Court, and have now come before this Division Court for disposal. After...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1904)ILR27Bom122
Tyabji, J.1. This suit was filed by Mr. Jehangir Manekji Cursetji against the Secretary of State for India in Council on the 6th November, 1900, complaining of a Resolution of the Government of Bombay, set forth in the plaint, and praying that the plaintiff may be awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 as damages sustained by the wrongful acts of Government, and that the said Resolution dated the 6th November, 1899, may be ordered to be set aside, and for costs of the suit.2. The plaintiff, at the time of the Resolution complained of, was a Government servant in the Provincial Civil Service of the Bombay Presidency, and, according to the plaint, had served Government for twenty-five years. Prior to this Resolution ha was serving as a fourth grade Deputy Collector, and was in charge of the treasury. The Resolution, which is dated the 6th November, 1899, is based upon a, memorandum from the Commissioner, C.D., commenting on the conduct of the plaintiff in respect of certain of the plaintiff's act...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1906)8BOMLR421
Batty, J.1. Gentlemen of the Jury, you have heard this case very patiently and listened very carefully to the evidence placed before you, as well as to the very able utterances of counsel on both sides. No doubt, it will not be necessary for me to say much in addition to what has already been said, but I trust that I may be able to give some little assistance in placing before you the essentials of the offence with which the accused is charged, so that you may be able to apply correct principles to the facts which appear in the evidence and especially in Exhibit C, the article which is the subject of the charge.2. Now the charge against the accused is that he being the proprietor and publisher of a certain vernacular newspaper entitled the Bhala, under the heading or title translated 'A Durbar in Hell' on page 2 of that newspaper dated 11th October 1905 did attempt to bring into hatred or contempt, or attempted to excite disaffection towards the Government established by Law in British...
Tag this Judgment!