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

1950 Supreme(Mad) 196

PANCHAPAKESA AYYAR


Advocates:
Petition under sections 435 and 439, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, praying that the High Court will be pleased to revise the order of detention, dated 6th May, 1950, in C.C.No.5 of 1950, Sub-Divisional Magistrate’s Court, Narasaraopet.
The Assistant Public Prosecutor (A.S. Sivakaminathan) for Petitioner.

Order.-

The learned Public Prosecutor is right when he says that there is no provision to direct an order of detention in a Borstal School to run consecutively with such a previous order of detention, as in the case of a sentence of imprisonment. Besides, detention in a Borstal School is a reformatory measure, like admonition, and there is a little point in piling detention on detention any more than in giving admonition after admonition. So, the learned Magistrate’s order directing this detention to be consecutive to the previous one is set aside, and the detention directed here is allowed to be merged in the previous detention (ordered in C.C. No. 6 of 1950, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narasaraopet) and to run concurrently with it till that term is over.

V.S. ----------- Petition allowed.


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