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

1991 Supreme(Ker) 138

B.M.TULSIDAS
Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioner was the accused in C.C. No. 505 of 1988 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, Attingal. He was represented by counsel in the case. The Court found him guilty, convicted and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- by judgment dated 1-1-1991. His counsel applied for a free copy of the judgment under Section 363, Cr.P.C. By the impugned order, the memo filed by the counsel was rejected and a free copy was refused finding that there was breach of sub-section (2) of Section 363, Cr.P.C.

2. When an accused is sentenced to imprisonment, copy of the judgment shall immediately be given to him free of cost. On his application a certified copy of the judgment or when he so desires, a translation in his own language if practicable or in the language of the Court, shall be given to him without delay, and such copy shall in every case, if the judgment is appealable by the accused, be given free of cost (sub-section (2) of Section 363, Cr.P.C.) As pointed out already, by the judgment the petitioner had been sentenced to pay fine. The judgment is appealable. He has a right to get copy of the judgment under sub-section (2) of Section 363, Cr.P.C. The Court






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