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

1963 Supreme(Bom) 84

VASANTI A.NAIK
Pheroze Jehangir Dastoor – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent


JUDGMENT - 1. This is an application in revision from the order of the Presidency Magistrate, 17th Court, Mazagaan, Bombay, dismissing the complaint on the ground that ho had no jurisdiction to entertain the same. The material facts may be briefly stated as follows: The complainant lodged a complaint in the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, 16th Court, Esplanade, Bombay, on 5-11-62 alleging that the three accused had committed offences under Sections 120-B, 403, 448, 341, 454 and 114 I. P. C. According to the complainant, these offences were committed in the year 1953 within the territorial limits of Daman, which was then a foreign territory, so far as India is concerned, and was governad hy the Portuguese Government. After the complaint was lodged, process was issued and the accused appeared before the Court on 14-3-1963. They raised the Question about the jurisdiction of tha Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, to entertain the complaint. Thereafter the case was adjourned to 9-5-63 for recording evidence. It was then transferred to the 17th Court, Mazagaon, Bombay. It was contended before the trial Magistrate that since Daman has been included in the Union Territories with effect fro









































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