IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr. Justice Somasundaram.
Korrapaty Appayya
Versus
Talla Rama Subbayya
Cr.R.C. No. 779 of 1949. (Cr.R.P. No. 717 of 1949.)
Decided On : 17 March 1950
The charge on which the petitioner is convicted is that he gave instructions to P.W.6, the lawyer, who put certain questions which were defamatory. P.W.6 having acted as lawyer to the petitioner is debarred under section 126 of the Evidence Act to disclose the instructions given to him. Apart from the section which is clear on the point, it is also covered by the judgment of Burn, J., in Palaniappa Chettiar v. Emperor1. The only other evidence is that given by P.W.4. But that does not prove the prosecution case. The conviction by the learned Additional Magistrate on the evidence of the lawyer P.W.6 is unsustainable. It is set aside and the accused acquitted. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.
V.S. ----- Petition allowed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.