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

1934 Supreme(Mad) 2

BARDSWELL
Yedama Subbaramiah – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


ORDER

Bardswell, J.

1. The conviction of the petitioner for offences punishable under Section 325-B and 353, I. P. C. and the sentences therefore must be set aside. The warrant o arrest the execution of which was resisted by the petitioner is clearly an illegal one. The warrant of arrest was signed by the Deputy Nazir an officer who had not been empowered legally or given any lawful authority to sign warrants, and the fact that it had been the practice for a considerable time for such warrants to be signed by the Deputy Nazir cannot make the signing of them by that officer legal in the absence of due authorization. The petitioner who has been admitted to bail is acquitted and set at liberty and his bail bond will be discharged.

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