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

1956 Supreme(Mad) 84

SOMASUNDARAM


Advocates:
T.M. Kasthuri for the Petitioners.
The Public Prosecutor (P.S. Kailasam) on behalf of the State.

Order

This is a revision against an order of the Vth Presidency Magistrate Egmore, directing the issue of summons to four persons by name Sri Rose, Krishnamoorthy, Seetharaman and Rangaswami. In the charge-sheet filed by the police against the accused these witnesses were not mentioned. It is also conceded that there witnesses were not examined by the police till after the charge was framed which was on 19th December, 1955. The charge-sheet was filed on 25th November, 1955 and after the examination of some witnesses the charge was framed on 19th December, 1955 and it is posted for further cross-examination. These witnesses were examined for the first time by the police only on 29th December, 1955 and, at the instance of the prosecution, the Magistrate has directed summons to issue to them to be examined as witnesses for the prosecution. It is doubtful whether after the filing of the final charge-sheet there can be any further investigation into the case by the police. If there can be no further investigation into the case certainly no witnesses can be examined by the police and they cannot be put forward as witnesses of the prosecution. There is conflict of opinion on this question





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