Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2371; (1973)4SCC54; 1973(5)LC343(SC)
Shelat, J.1. On August 24, 1971, the District Magistrate, Surdvan passed an order of detention against the petitioner under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the maintenance of internal Security Act, 1971 on the ground that it was necessary to do so with a view to preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Pursuant to the order, the petitioner was arrested on September 5, 1971 and has since then been in jail.2. The grounds of detention served on the petitioner at the time of his arrest read as follows :1. That you on 31-12-70 at about 1950 hours with your associates, armed with lethal weapons with a vide to promoting the cause of the extremist party to which you belong, went to Chinakuri and surrounded one Sulaxman Singh on the road near Chinakuri Pit No. 3 Colliery Hospital while he was returning to his house on a motor cycle from Chinakuri Bazar and stabbed him (Sulaxman Singh) with daggers causing his death. Your ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2259; (1972)2SCC672
I.M. Shelat, J.1. By his Order, dated November 22, 1971, the District Magistrate, Nadia, directed the detention of the petitioner under and by virtue of power conferred upon him by Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 26 of 1971. The Order recites that it was issued with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public Order. Consequent upon the passing of the said Order, the petitioner was arrested on December 1, 1971 and he has since then been detained in Dum Dum Central Jail.2. The grounds of detention furnished to the petitioner at the time of his arrest stated as follows:(1) On the night of 30-7-71 at about 2000 hours you along with your associates entered into the Toddi Shop of Shri Gopinath Behara s/o Late Ram Behara at Gangnapore P. S. Ranaghat, District Nadia, and stabbed Shri Gopinath Behara with daggers causing severe bleeding injuries on his person. You also ter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2373; [1972]85ITR599(SC); (1972)2SCC436; [1973]1SCR742
A.N. Grover, J.1. These appeals have been brought by certificate from a judgment of the Calcutta High Court in two Income tax References.2. It is most unfortunate that the statement of the case contains certain omissions and errors and does not appear to have been drafted with the usual care with which such statements are drawn.3. The assessee Guzdar Kajora Coal Mines Ltd. which was incorporated on July 4, 1945 purchased by a deed of conveyance dated April 3, 1966 executed by the liquidators of Guzdar Kajora Colliery Co. Ltd. all the colliery lands, hereditaments and premises, mines, minerals, powers and privileges and all other hereditaments together with the machinery thereon belonging to the latter company. It was stipulated in the deed of conveyance that the sale was to be effective from July 1, 1945. The consideration for the transfer was Rs. 6 lacs and was allocated as follows :-(a) the value of the machinery plants stores including stock of goods grains coals at the pithead and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2378; (1973)4SCC87; 1973(5)LC265(SC)
Khanna, J.1. This is a petition through jail under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus by Binode Hembram, who has been ordered to be detained under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act by the District Magistrate Midnapore 'with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.'2. The petitioner in pursuance of the detention order was arrested on December 29, 1971 and was served with the order of detention as well as the grounds of detention together with the vernacular translation thereof. Report about the making of the detention order was sent by the District Magistrate to the State Government along with necessary particulars on December 30, 1971 and the detention order was approved by the Government on January 4, 1972. On January 10, 1972 the State Government received representation from the petitioner. The said representation was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2225; 1974(0)BLJR79; 1972CriLJ1444; (1972)2SCC532; [1973]1SCR738; 1973(5)LC267(SC)
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave by Ram Narain Singh and six others against the judgment of Patna High Court, whereby their revision petition was dismissed in limine.2. There was a dispute between the appellants on the one side and Ram Prasad and others on the opposite side in respect of plot No. 23 situated in village Deayapur in District Patna. Proceedings under Section 144 of the CrPC were taken in September, 1958 because of that dispute. In October, 1959 dispute again arose between the parties because of the alleged breaking of the idol of Durga by some of the appellants. The idol was stated to have been installed by Ram Prasad. The breaking of the idol gave rise to a criminal case against Ram Narain Singh and Arjan Singh. The accused were, however, stated to have been acquitted in that case. On May 7, 1959 Ram Prasad filed an application before the Sub Divisional Magistrate Diaper against the appellants and some others for taking action under Section 107 of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2590; (1972)2SCC677
H.R. Khanna, J.1. Hasan Ali petitioner was ordered by the District Magistrate Midnapore as per order dated October 11, 1971 to be detained under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act 'with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community'. In pursuance of that order, the petitioner was arrested on October 24, 1971 and was served with the order of detention along with the ground of detention together with vernacular translation thereof. The petitioner has approached this Court through nail under Article 32 of the Constitution for issuing a writ of habeas corpus.2. The District Magistrate sent report to the State Government or October 13, 1971 about the making of the detention order together with necessary particulars. The said Government approved the detention order on October 21, 1971. Sometime after November 10, 1971 the State Government received representation dated November 8, 1971 f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2058; 1972CriLJ1315; (1972)2SCC451
I.D. Dua, J.1. The only point raised on behalf of the appellant by his learned Counsel Shri A. K. Nag is based on the argument that the provisions of Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code were not complied with by the trial court.2. The appellant was charged under Section 411, Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 of the Railway Stores (Unlawful Possession) Act, 195. According to the prosecution case on January 7, 1967 Shri K. K. Venkateswaram, Sub-Inspector of Railway Police Force Chakradharpur, along with others, was coming to Chakradharpur in a third class bogey of 328 Down Nagpur-Chakradharpur Passenger train. They heard some knocking sounds emanating from the adjoining bogey when the train was between Jaraikela and Manoharpur railway stations. As soon as the train reached Manoharpur station Venkateswaram. along with P. Y. Kundulu, Head Rakshak and D. Bhas-kar Rao, went into the adjoining bogey and found the accused alone there. On inspection of the bogey they detected that the mirr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2056; 1972CriLJ1313; (1972)2SCC537; [1973]1SCR734
H.R. Khanna, J.1. Shri Kishun, Ram Bali, Jai Shri and Jattan were convicted by learned Sessions Judge Ballia under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code for causing the death of Seru (aged 45) and under Section 323 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code for causing injuries to Sadaphal (PW 2), and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on the former count and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year on the latter count. The sentences in the case of each accused were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal the High Court of Allahabad affirmed the order of the trial court. The foul accused thereafter came to this Court by special leave. The leave was, however, limited to the question whether the offence disclosed was murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder or some lesser offence.2. Ram Ball and Jattan accused are brothers. Likewise, Shri Kishun and Jai Shri accused are brothers and are the nephew of Ram Bali and Jattan. The prosecution case is that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC844; 1973CriLJ667; (1973)3SCC63; 1973(5)LC242(SC)
Dua, J.1. In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution the petitioner Shri Nagen Murmu challenges the order of his detention dated December 24, 1971 made by the District Magistrate, Midnapore under Section 3, Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 26 of 1971 (hereinafter called the Act). The detenu was arrested pursuant to the order of detention on December 29, 1971 on which date the grounds of detention were also served on him. This fact was reported to the State Government on December 30, 1971 and the detention order was approved by the State Government on January 4, 1972. The detenu's representation was received by the State Government on January 10, 1972 and was considered by it on February 19, 1972. The grounds on which the detention order was passed are :1. That on the midnight of 13/14.10. '69, you along with nearly 200 others armed with guns, bows and arrows, tangis and other deadly weapons raised the house of Jiban Krish...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC2054; (1972)2SCC589; 1973(5)LC225(SC)
Ray, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate from the judgment dated 7 December, 1965 of the High Court of Patna decreeing the appellant's suit in part and setting aside the judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge dismissing the suit of the appellant.2. The appellant filed a suit for the sum of Rs. 167017/- as balance due to the appellant for earth work done for cutting canal and raising embankments for a project known as Balwa Sathi Distributory.3. On 1 April, 1951 the appellant's tender was accepted and the contract for construction work was entered into. The work was completed in the month of June, 1952. The appellant claimed his total dues to be Rs. 5,09,053/-. The appellant's case was that he was paid Rs. 3,42,036/-. The appellant filed the suit for the balance sum of money.4. One of the principal issues was whether the mode of measurement adopted by the defendant was correct and proper. There are two types of measurement for construction work. One is called the pit measurement...
Tag this Judgment!