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

1964 Supreme(All) 153

M.H.BEG
Devi Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
Anand Deo Gir, C.S. Saran, D. Behari, S.S. Tewari, for Appellant; Dy. G.A. (Mahamed Husain), for Respondents.

JUDGMENT :- These are three appeals by the twenty two convicted out of thirty accused persons many of whom were tried upon a number of charges all joined together as they were in respect of offences alleged to have been committed in the course of one vast conspiracy. The object of the conspiracy was said to have been to obtain cement and iron by means of forged permits in favour of fictitious and non-existent individuals and to use these controlled goods for the purposes of black marketing and also for adulteration of cement, by mixture with sand and earth, and its sale as good and genuine cement. Originally, there were thirty one accused persons, but one Nathmal (P. W. 275) was permitted to become an approver and given a conditional pardon so that he may reveal the inner workings of the conspiracy which was said to have been unearthed due to the information given and efforts made by Sri Pannalal Trivedi who came forward, as a public spirited citizen, with an application (Ex Ka-1) which was received in the office of Sri Sampurnanand, the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, on 26th September 1955, containing allegations which Sri Trivedi had already made orally to the Chief Minist









































































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