Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1925; 1971CriLJ1432; (1971)3SCC239; [1971]SuppSCR200; 1971(III)LC535(SC)
Vaidialingam, J.1. This appeal, by special leave is, directed against the judgment and order dated 14/17 June, 1968 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No. 475 of 1967 reversing the orders passed by the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, discharging the accused-appellants.2. The circumstances leading up to the order of the High Court may be indicated: The second respondent filed a complaint on January 3, 1967 before the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, in respect of the incident which took place on the second day (January 1, 1967) of the Second Cricket Test Match between India and West Indies at the Eden Gardens. The Test Match was to be played under the control, management and supervision of the Cricket Association of Bengal, which had sold tickets of various denominations for the game. There were tickets sold for all days of the Match and there were arrangements made for the sale of daily tickets. The game started as scheduled on Decemb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1337; 1973(0)BLJR326; (1971)2SCC28; [1971]SuppSCR181
J.M. Shelat, J.1. Two questions arise in this appeal. The first is whether the transaction evidenced by Ex. 1, dated March 20, 1915 was a family arrangement so as to confer on the appellant and his father, Nanhku Prasad, since deceased, title to a half share in the house in dispute. The second is that even if it was so, whether such title became extinguished as a result of adverse possession for the statutory period by Baijnath, the deceased husband of respondent 1.2. The parties are near relations. The following genealogy explains the relationship amongst them: Rajkumar Singh _________________________________________|________________________________ | | | | Lalji Singh Amar Singh Ramji Singh Raghunandan | Reshmi Kuer Patreja Kuer Singh ____|_______________ | | | | | | | Nanhku Pd. | Siba Faujda Balkeshwar | Singh | | | (Plff. No. 1) | | | | | Deonath | Shambhu Pd. | __________________________| Singh | | | (plff. No. 2) | Sonadhari Girwardhari Kamaldhari | | | Tarkeshwar Pd. Baijnath P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1190; (1972)4SCC263; 1971(III)LC550(SC)
V. Bhargava, J.1. The respondent, Gopal Chandra Khound, is the holder of a licence of a country liquor shop issued by the appellant, Sub-Divisional Officer and Collector, Shivasagar. The Superintendent of Excise of the Sibsagar Sub-Division, in which the shop of the respondent is situated, inspected some liquor shops in the month of June, 1965 and discovered that some of the bottles in the shops were not properly sealed. The covers could be turned all round without detaching them from the bottles and without breaking the seal. There could also be seepage from the covers if the bottles were turned up side down. He felt that this left a scope for tampering as well as deterioration in strength of the liquor in storage beyond the permissible limits; and, consequently, a few days later, on 24th June, 1965, he issued a letter to the Officer-in-Charge, Warehouses, Jorhat and Nazira; which were issuing the sealed bottles, to take all possible steps to secure the marked closures properly and to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1533; 1971CriLJ1164; (1971)3SCC460; 1971(III)LC559(SC)
A.N. Grover, J.1. These appeals by special leave are from a common judgment of the Assam & Nagaland High Court and are directed against the orders made by that Court quashing the charges for alleged offences under certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The fact may be stated, Lt. Col. G. K. Apte, the respondent in Cr.A. No. 164/68 was posted to Tejpur as Staff Officer No. 1 in the summer of the year 1960. It appears that a project known as the 'Tusker Project' had to carried out in the NEFA area The main duty of the units employed in the Project was the making of roads in the NEFA area to enable the movements of troops etc. in the event of any Chinese aggression. Brigadier Mani was in-charge of the Project as Military Chief Engineer, Apte was posted as Staff Officer No. 1. This post corresponded to that of a Superintending Engineer on the Civil side. The Chief Engineer had various powers which he could delegate to the senior officers wor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1606; 1973(0)BLJR774; 1971CriLJ1177; (1971)1SCC855; [1971]SuppSCR133
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. The short question that arises in this appeal, by special leave, is whether the judgment and order of the Patna High Court dated May 10, 1968, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 453 of 1966, are in conformity with Section 423 of the CrPC, (hereinafter to be referred as the Code).2. The appellants, who are accused Nos. 2 to 5, along with the first accused Sia Devi (wife of 5th accused) were tried by the learned First Assistant Sessions Judge, Biharsharif, for an offence under Section 363 of the; Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution was as follows:3. One Kanta Kumari, an orphan minor, and niece of the complainant (P.W. 1) Parmeshwar Pandey was under the lawful guardianship and protection of the latter and residing with him since the death of her parents. At about 8 P.M. on February 14, 1965, the fifth accused and his wife, the first accused, came to the house of the complainant and called Kanta Kumari. Kanta Kumari responded to the call by coming out. Wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1367; 1971CriLJ1096; (1971)1SCC774; [1971]SuppSCR172
Dua, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated March 13, 1968 affirming the order of a learned single Judge of that Court directing that a complaint be filed against the appellant for his prosecution for making a false statement in para 10 of his affidavit dated July 6, 1960 to the effect that he had not been acting as Sarpanch till December 7, 1957.2. The relevant facts necessary for understanding the controversy may now be briefly stated. Chajoo Ram, appellant, was elected Sarpanch of the Nyaya Panchayat of Risia Bazar, Tehsil Nanpora, District Bharaic at the election held for that office on October 29, 1956. Radhey Shyam (respondent in this Court) who was defeated in that election filed an election petition which was dismissed on June 3, 1958. During the trial of that petition an injunction was issued restraining the appellant from functioning as a Sarpanch. That order remained in force from Dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1262; (1971)1SCC795; [1971]SuppSCR146
Vaidialingam, J.1. This appeal, under Section 123 of the Jammu & Kashmir, Representation of the People Act, 1957 thereinafter to be referred as the Act) as amended by Act 11 of 1967, is directed against the judgment and order dated December 15, 1967 of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in Election Petition No. 37 of 1967. Section 123 of the Act corresponds to Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act. 1951.2. In the General Election held in 1967, the appellant and the respondent had duly filed their nominations for election to the Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly from the Reasi Assembly Constituency. Scrutiny of the nomination papers was conducted on January 23, 1967 and the polling took place on February 21, 1967. The counting of the ballot papers took place on February 27, 1967 and the appellant was declared duly elected by a majority of 418 votes. The respondent filed an election petition on April 8, 1967 being No. 37 of 1967 challenging the election of the appellant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1371; 1971CriLJ1100; (1972)4SCC845
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. Special Leave has been granted by this Court to the Appellant Shaikh Alimuddin Ahmed (Criminal Appeal No. 172 of 1968) and Kali Prosad Poddar, Appellant (Criminal Appeal No. 232 of 1968) against the summary dismissal by the High Court of Criminal Revision Petitions filed by them In which they challenged the order of the Presidency Magistrate 6th Court, Calcutta, committing them to stand trial in the Sessions Court for offences under Sections 120B, 420, Indian Penal Code. The circumstances in which the Appellants were committed to the Sessions Court arose out of a complaint filed by Bidhu Bhusan Bhattachariee alleging that Ramgopal Neotia of Geekay Corporation, Sudhir Chatterji a salesman of the India Automobiles in conspiracy with Appellants Alimuddin Ahmed and Kali Prosad Poddar sold a second-hand Bedford Diesel Chassis representing it to be a new one. It appears that Shaikh Serajuddin had purchased in the name of his son the Appellant Alimuddin a Bedford Die...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1620; 1971CriLJ1184; 1972MHLJ256(SC); (1971)2SCC96; [1971]SuppSCR125
Sikri, C.J.1. This appeal by special leave by the State of Madhya Pradesh is against the judgment of the High Court allowing the appeal of the respondents, Mir Basi Ali Khan, Mir Shahniwaz Ali Khan and Mir Sarfaraz Ali Khan, and setting aside the conviction and sentences passed on them by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, who had convicted them under Section 120B and Section 420, I.P.C. The respondents were, however, acquitted of the charge under Section 406, I.P.C. We may mention that there were two committal orders made by the learned Magistrate, First Class, Bhopal, on April 5, 1965 and on October 12, 1965, respectively, which gave rise to two Sessions Trials, No. 90 of 1965 and No. 98 of 1965. The learned Sessions Judge disposed of both the trials by a single judgment as he was of the view that both the trials were in effect a single trial of a single conspiracy and of several incidents of cheating. The respondents also filed one appeal before the High Court and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1132; 1971CriLJ844; (1971)1SCC626; [1971]SuppSCR76
Sikri, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 129 of the Constitution of India by Shri C.K. Daphtary and three other advocates bringing to our notice the alleged contempt of this Court committed by the respondents (1) O.P. Gupta, (2) Rising Sun Press, Delhi, through its proprietor, and (3) M/s. Kanak Book Depot. Respondent No. 3-Kanak Book Depot-has not been traced. Respondent No. 1, O.P. Gupta, appeared in person, and the proprietor of the Rising Sun Press, Mela Ram, also appeared in person.2. In the petition it is stated that Civil Appeal No. 1711 of 1967 was filed in this Court by the State of U.P. against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad whereby the High Court had held that the order of dismissal from service passed against respondent No. 1, O.P. Gupta, was invalid. This appeal came up for hearing before this Court on various occasions and was ultimately heard by a Bench consisting of Shah J as he then was, and Hegde. J., on October 15, 1969 and October 16, 1969 (and, a...
Tag this Judgment!