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

1957 Supreme(AP) 268

S. Abdul Jabbar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


( 1 ) THESE revision petitions are preferred against the orders of the Additional sessions Judge, Kurnool, affirming the orders of the Judicial II Class Magistrate, nandikotkur, directing the laying of complaints against the petitioners for offences under section 193, Indian Penal Code.

( 2 ) THE facts which give rise to these petitions are as follows :- the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nandikotkur, had filed a charge-sheet against three persons viz. , Narayana Chetty, Ramalingam Chetty and their sister Eswaramma under section 364 and section 302 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code alleging that they had abducted one Salu Miah and caused his death on the night of 25th july, 1955 at Vodde Manu. The three petitioners were cited as eye-witnesses to the occurrence. During the investigation the Sub-Magistrate of Kurnool recorded the statements of these petitioners under section 164, Criminal Procedure Code. In those statements the petitioners stated on oath that they had witnessed the attack on Salu Miah by the three accused and gave details of the attack.

( 3 ) THE preliminary enquiry in the case (P. R. C. No. 12 of 1955) was conducted by the Judicial II Class Magistrate, Nandikotkur,



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