SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1947 Supreme(SC) 30

Srinivas Mall Bairoliya and another – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
India Office., Hy. S.L. Polak and Co., Crown, B.J. Macenna, R. Ritson, U. Sen-Gupta , W.W.K. Paye

Lord Du Parcq:-

The appellants were convicted on 4-11-1943 by the Deputy Magistrate of Darbhanga, under the Defence of India Rules relating to the control of prices and were sentenced to terms of imprisonment. The Sessions Judge confirmed the convictions and the sentences. Applications to the High Court of Patna for the revision of the judgment of the Sessions Judge were dismissed. The appellants obtained special leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court to His Majesty in Council.

[2] Srinivas Mall Bairoliya (hereafter called appellant 1) was at the material time acting as Salt Agent for part of the district of Darbhanga. He had been appointed to this office in October, 1942, by the District Magistrate. It was his duty to sell to licensed retail dealers the supplies of salt which were allocated by the central Government to his part of the Darbhanga District. Sitaram Prasad, who will be referred to hereafter as appellant 2, was employed by appellant 1, who had entrusted him with the duty of allotting the appropriate quantity of salt to each retail dealer, and noting on the buyer's licence the quantity which he had bought and received.

[3] The proper performance of these dutie






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top