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

1954 Supreme(Ker) 158

VITHAYATHIL, KUMARA PILLAI
Govindankutty Menon – Appellant
Versus
Chandy – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The complainant in C.C. No. 41 of 1953 of the Second Class Magistrate's Court, Kanayannur, is the revision petitioner. He is the Sanitary Inspector of the Ernakulam Municipality. The complaint relates to an offence under S. 4(1) of the Cochin Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, Act XIV of 1109. The case is that tea sold by the third accused in a shop conducted by accused 1 and 2 contained extraneous matter. After the examination of the prosecution witnesses and the defence witnesses the case was posted to 27.3.1954 for final hearing. On that day neither the complainant nor his advocate was present. The learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint under S. 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and acquitted the accused. The revision petition is from the order of acquittal.

2. Two grounds were urged in this Revision petition. One is that there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure for adjourning a case for argument after taking the evidence of the complainant and the accused and that, therefore, failure on the part of the complainant to be present on the date to which the case was adjourned for argument cannot attract the Provisions of S. 247, Code of Crimina















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