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

1916 Supreme(Cal) 320

LANCELOT SANDERSON, WALMSLEY
Ram Das Singh – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sanderson, C.J. - In this case we think the Rule should be discharged.

2. We desire to point out that with regard to two of the convictions which the learned Magistrate considered as proved, they were not in our opinion proved in a proper way. But this matter does not affect our decision, because the learned Magistrate found upon the evidence that there was an overwhelming proof of the petitioner's bad repute as a thief, and further than that, that there were two convictions which were properly proved. Consequently, our decision is that this Rule should be discharged. But coming back for a moment to the two convictions which, in our opinion, were not properly proved, what happened, as far as I can understand was this. A finger-mark expert was called as a witness, and he examined certain finger prints of the accused taken in Court when the trial was proceeding. These finger marks were apparently put upon a piece of paper, which is Exhibit 18 Then was shown to the witness another paper, Exhibit 19, which contained certain fingerprints and also had a record of certain convictions which purported to be the convictions of this accused. Thereupon, the expert witness compared the m

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