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

1991 Supreme(Kar) 459

M.RAMA JOIS, B.J.HEGDE
B. SUBBAIAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Advocates:
A.H.BHAGAVAN, JAGADISH D.HIREMATHH, K.RANGAVAJULLA, M.V.DEVARAJ, SRINIVASA REDDY, V.N.SATHYANARAYAN, VISHVANATH SHENDGE

( 1 ) THESE three criminal appeals were posted for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Chandrakantaraja Urs, J. , (since retired) and one of us (Jagannatha Hegde. J. ). They were divided in their opinion. In the circumstances, as provided under Section 392 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short) by the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the appeals were posted before one of us (Rama Jois, J), for healing. After hearing the matter, the opinion and the order was pronounced on 4-10-1991. In doing so reference was made to para 3 (ii) of the judgement to the two judgments of Calcutta High Court, namely, Nemal v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1966 Cal 194 : (1966 Cri LJ 522) and Jugal Kishore v. C. P. Magistrate, Calcutta. , AIR 1968 Cal 220: (1968 Cri LJ 604 ). In each of the two decisions, the third Judge who heard the criminal appeal in accordance with Section 429 of the 1898 Code, was of the view that in view of the language of that Section to the effect that the third Judge should deliver his opinion and that judgment and order shall follow such opinion, the third Judge should proceed to pass final orders. Following this ratio, opinion was furni




















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