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

1932 Supreme(Cal) 83

MITTER
Yasin Moral – Appellant
Versus
Isaf Khan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Mitter, J. - The present Rule is directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the Union Bench under the provisions of the Village Self-Government Act (Bengal Act 5 of 1919). A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this Rule by Mr. Sanyal who appears for the Grown, and he contends that, having regard to the provisions of the Village" Self-Government Act, this Court cannot interfere u/s 439, Criminal P. C., as it is said that the procedure laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 E Ch. 33, shall not apply to any trial, suitor proceedings before a Union Bench or a Union Court: see Section 93, Bengal Act 5 of 1919. It is further argued that Section 71 of the said Act provides that:

notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, there shall be no appeal by a convicted person in any case tried by a Union Bench: Provided that the District Magistrate or Subdivisional Magistrate, if satisfied that a failure of justice has occurred, may, of his own motion, or on the application of the parties concerned, cancel or modify any order of conviction or of compensation made by a Union Bench or direct the retrial of any case by

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