Naresh Prasad Mittal vs Mahavir Singh-18/01/1960

In the case of Bansi v. Hari Singh, 1956 Cri LJ 561 : ((S) AIR 1956 All 297) it was observed at page 568 that by virtue of Section 426 Cr. P. C., the High Court in entertaining a revision against an order of a subordinate court has full power to stay or suspend the execution of any order for the pendency of the revision. Similar powers have now been given under Section 435 (1) Cr. P. C. to Sessions Judges.

Where rights which are claimed are purely of a private character no mandamus to be issued- Allahabad HC-19/11/2020

Where the rights which are sought to be agitated are purely of a private character no mandamus can be claimed, and even if the relief is sought against the State or any of its instrumentality the pre-condition for the issuance…

Conviction for “Dacoity” of less than five persons is not sustainable-Allhabad HC-09/07/2020

It is thus clear that for recording conviction of an offence of robbery, there must be five or more persons. In absence of such finding, an accused cannot be convicted for an offence of dacoity. In a given case, however, it may happen that there may be five or more persons and the factum of five or more persons is either not disputed or is clearly established, but the court may not be able to record a finding as to identity of all the persons said to have committed dacoity and may not be able to convict them and order their acquittal observing that their identity is not established.