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

1983 Supreme(Cal) 29

JITENDRA NATH CHAUDHURI, B.C.CHAKRABARTI
KASIMUDDIN – Appellant
Versus
YUNUS ALI MONDAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
DIPAK SENGUPTA, MIHIR ROY, MUKTI MAITRA, R.N.CHAKRABORTY, S.S.ROY

B. C. CHAKRABARTI, JITENDRA NATH CHAUDHURI, JJ.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against an order of acquittal passed by the Assistant Sessions judge, Murshibad in Sessions Trial No. 2 of February, 1975 acquitting the respondents 1 to 6 of charges under Section 120b read with Sections 467 and 429 of the Penal Code.

( 2 ) LEARNED advocates for the respondents took a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeal at the instance of the appellant. Their contention is that an appeal being a creature of the statute could only be preferred if there are adequate provisions in that behalf in the Code itself. Mr. Chakrabarty appearing on behalf of the State also supported the contention of the respondents. In this connection a reference was made to the provisions of Section 417, Sub-section (3) of the Old code of Criminal Procedure. There is no dispute that the case is governed by the provisions of the Old Code. Section 417 empowers the State Government to present an appeal from an original or appellate order of acquittal passed by any Court other than a High Court. Sub-section (3) is an exception which provides that if such an order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon co








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