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

1963 Supreme(Cal) 211

AMARESH ROY
MADHAB CHANDRA CHARCHARI – Appellant
Versus
NALINI MANNA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anil Kumar Sen, Bejoy Basanta Koley, MADHUSUDAN BANERJI, S.N.GHORAI

AMARESH ROY, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule is directed against an appellate order of acquittal passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge' of Midnapore acquitting the two opposite parties who had been convicted by the trial Magistrate of offence under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- In default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two weeks under that section. In the trial Court there were five accused persons Including the present opposite parties. The common charge against all of them was one under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. In addition to that charge, the opposite parties Nalini Manna and Kallpada Kulavi and another person named Sudhangsu Das had also been charged for an offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and another accused Monoranjan Kulavi was charged under Section 426 of the Indian Penal Code. The teamed Magistrate acquitted all the accused persona of the charge under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. He also acquitted Sudhangsu Das, Nalini Manna and Kalipada Kulavi under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Monoranjan Kulavi of the charge















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