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

1939 Supreme(Cal) 207

SEN, KHUNDKAR
K. Hoshide – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sen, J. - The point involved in this rule relates to the propriety of an order of the-Chief Presidency Magistrate issuing a search warrant u/s 96, Criminal P.C. The facts briefly are these. On 4th April 1939, Mr. P.K. Mukherjee, Assistant Commissioner of the Calcutta Police in the Detective Department, addressed a letter to the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta. As the decision of this matter will depend largely on the effect and interpretation of this letter I reproduce it in full below:

(A)

1. Messrs. Toyo Menka Kaisha Ltd., 4, Clive Ghat Street.

2. Pannalal Sagarmal, 112, Cross Street.

3. Meghraj Kanaiya Lal, 2nd floor, 113, Monohar Das Katra.

4. B.M. Kharwar, 1st floor, 161, Harrison Road.

5. Khanna and Co., 35, Cross Street.

6. Jewan Ram Ganga Ram, 35, Cross Street.

7. Bisweswar Lal Chiman Lal, Groundfloor, 174, Harrison Road.

8. Hazarimal Hiralal, 60, Cross Street, and 148, Cotton Street.

9. Jewanram Periwal, 1st floor, 113, Monohar Das Katra.

(B)

1. Bholaram Mussuddi, P. 22, New Jagannath Ghat Road,

2. Kanaya Lal Tharar, 1, New Jagannath Ghat Road.

3. Nagarmal Bhawalka and 4, Indra Chand Bhawalka, 10, Vivekananda Boad, 3rd floor.

To

The Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.

Sir,

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