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

1970 Supreme(Ker) 167

P.T.RAMAN NAYAR, K.K.MATHEW
SREEDHARA – Appellant
Versus
JAWALA PRASAD GUPTA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. We do not think this appeal lies.

2. The power under S.561A of the Criminal Procedure Code is in the nature of a revisional power and an order made by a single judge in exercise of that power is not an order in the exercise of original jurisdiction so as to attract an appeal to a "Bench of two judges" under clause (1) of S.5 of the Kerala High Court Act Clause (6) of S.4 is but a synopsis of clause (1) of S.S, and, in any cast has no bearing on the maintainability of the appeal. The right of appeal, and the corresponding power to entertain it are conferred by S.5 and not by S.4 which only enumerates the matters in respect of which a Bench of two judges can exercise the powers of the High Court and has nothing to do with what powers the High Court itself has.

3. Appeal dismissed. Dismissed.

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