Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
STUART, J.
Muhammad Ata & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Emperor Through Musammat Nannhon - Respondent
Decided On : 05-11-1921
JUDGMENT
Stuart, J. - The charge against the applicants was that they had committed theft by cutting and taking away the crop sowed by Musammat Nannhon. The Trial Court found distinctly that the crop in question had been sown by Musammat Nannhon and out by the accused without any right. They ware thus guilty of theft which may have been a technical theft, They were convicted accordingly. In appeal the point was raised that the crop in question stood upon fields which were in the cultivatory possession of the applicants themselves, The Magistrate who heard the appeal directed an enquiry upon that point. He had no right to direct an enquiry. If he liked be could have taken further evidence, There was not the slightest necessity to direct an enquiry as it was proved that the crop in question had been sown by the complainant. The Patwari and Janki Prasad prove this. It is not of the least consequence whether the complainant has or has not good title to the cultivation of the fields in question. It is sufficient if she sowed the crop. Now there is good evidence that she sowed the crop and that the applicants out the crop, I see no reason to disbelieve this evidence. The convictions are, therefore, good, The sentences are not excessive. I dismiss this application.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
