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

1953 Supreme(Bom) 165

P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, D.V.VYAS
State – Appellant
Versus
Harbansing Kisansing – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Gajendragadkar, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 366, Penal Code. The charge against the respondent was that on or about 26th April 1952, at Bandra he kidnapped Sharifa Mahomed in order that she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse and thereby committed an offence under Section 366, Penal Code. Another charge had been framed against the respondent and that was under Section 376. But it appeared clear that this latter offence was alleged to have been committed outside the jurisdiction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge and so the accused was not tiled in respect of this offence.

2. In support of the charge under Section 3S6 the prosecution examined the gin, Abbas, whom the mother of the girl has remarried, and the doctor. They have also led the evidence of other witnesses; but it is unnecessary to refer to that evidence. After the evidence was recorded and the plea of the accused was taken, the learned Judge directed the jury on 8th January 1953, to return a verdict of not guilty in favour of the accused on the charge in question



































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