Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC320a; 1957CriLJ416
Bhagwati, J.1. The appellant had been charged inter alia with having committed an offence under Section 396, Indian Penal Code in that he on 10/11th day of September, 1954, about two or three gharis before sunrise in village Banni Purwa, hamlet of Banni, police station Kotwali, Kheri, along with other persons committed dacoity in the house of Mendai and that in the commission of such dacoity, murder was committed by one of the members. The learned Sessions Judge found that the appellant, and others, had entered the house of Mendai with intent to commit a robbery but were foiled in the attempt owing to Mendai and Ganga having raised a hue and cry. The residents of Banni Purwa and the adjoining 'abadi' of village Banni arrived on the scene and the appellant and his companions, without collecting any booty, ran away from the house of Mendai. They were chased by Mendai and Ganga and when they were crossing the ditch of Pipra Farm, Mendai caught hold of one dacoit. Another dacoit who was id...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC7; 1957(0)BLJR5; (1956)IILLJ439SC; [1956]1SCR746
Bhagwati, J.1. The Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Lucknow dismissed the application of the appellant made under section 22 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act, 1950, for permission to dismiss the respondent, its workman, and the appellant obtained from this Court Special Leave to Appeal against that order. 2. The respondent has been working as a Steno-typist with the appellant since 3rd December, 1946, and is also the Vice-President of the Union of workers which is affiliated to the Indian National Trade Union Congress and is known as Chini Mills Mazdoor Sangh. One M. P. Singh has at all relevant times been and is still the General Manager of the appellant. 3. The relations between the appellant and its workmen are governed by the Standing Orders framed by mutual agreement between the Labour and the Sugar Mills in Uttar Pradesh which have been approved by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. Clause L(1) (j) of the said Standing Orders runs as under :- 'Drunkenness or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC133; 1957(0)BLJR355; [1956]1SCR756
Venkatarama Ayyar, J. 1. The point for decision in this appeal is whether a Thakurdwara of Sri Radhakrishnaji in the village of Bhadesia in the District of Sitapur is a private temple or a public one in which all the Hindus are entitled to worship. 2. One Sheo Ghulam, a pious Hindu and a resident of the said village, had the Thakurdwara constructed during the years 1914-1916, and the idol of Shri Radhakrishnaji ceremoniously installed therein. He was himself in management of the temple and its affairs till 1928 when he died without any issue. On March 6, 1919, he had executed a will whereby he bequeathed all his lands to the Thakur. The provisions of the will, in so far as they are material, will presently by referred to. The testator had two wives one of whom Ram Kuar, had predeceased him and the surviving widow, Raj Kuar, succeeded him as Mutawalli in terms of the will and was in management till her death in 1933. Then the first defendant, who is the nephew of Sheo Ghulam, got into p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC142; 1957CriLJ294; [1956]1SCR734
Govinda Menon, J.1. On September 6, 1955, this court granted the appellants herein, special leave to appeal under art. 136(1) of the Constitution from the judgment and order dated August 4, 1955, of the Allahabad High Court, in Criminal Appeal No. 298 of 1955 (Reference No. 31 of 1955) connected with Criminal Appeals Nos. 299 and 307 of 1955, limited to the question whether the failure to comply with the rules relating to the submission of the police case diary, vitiates the entire trial and what the consequences of such failure are. It is in pursuance to the leave so granted, that Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 1956, has been preferred by accused Nos. 4, 7, 1, 3, 5 & 2 (Niranjan Singh, Tikam Singh, Kharak Singh, Harpal Singh, Sardar Singh and Satpal Singh) respectively in Sessions Trial No. 142 of 1954, in the court of Session at Meerut and Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 1956, is preferred by accused No. 6 (Udaibir Singh) in the same Sessions trial. Appellants 1 to 3 in Criminal Appeal No. 60 o...
Tag this Judgment!