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

1936 Supreme(SC) 2

Nazir Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Crown, W. Wallach, C. Sidney Smith

Lord Blanesburgh:-

Their Lordships desire to re-affirm in this case the very exceptional circumstances in which alone they will humbly advise His Majesty to grant leave to appeal in a criminal case. They would not have it supposed that the advice which they propose to tender to His Majesty in this case indicates any weakening on their part of the most salutary judicial rule which prevents this Board from entertaining such applications, the Board not being a Court of Criminal Appeal, except in the most exceptional circumstances. What actuates the Board in advising His Majesty to grant leave to appeal in thus instance is that it appears that with reference to a section of the Criminal Procedure Code, which is of vital importance to accused persons, there has been a difference of opinion in the High Courts of India which, however it be resolved, ought to be resolved so that in the future there will be no doubt as to the law declared by that section. It is not a case of a view being taken by the High Court in the case under appeal, which, whether the view was right or wrong, would not be in the circumstances any justification for this Board entertaining an application for special leave


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