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

1952 Supreme(Mad) 67

SOMASUNDARAM
Raswami Udayar – Appellant
Versus
Raju Udayar, Complainant. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G. Gopalaswami, for Petitioner; Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the State.

Judgement

ORDER :- The petitioner in this case was convicted by the Stationary Sub-Magistrate. Vridhachalam, for an offence under S.498, I.P.C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs.200, and this was confirmed in appeal by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ulundurpet.

2. The facts are these. P.W.1, the complainant in this case married C.W.1 on 1-7-1946.Theyseem to have lived amicably for about three years. On 30-7-1949, C.W.1s father and her aunt, that is her fathers sister, both came to the village of P.W.1 and took C.W.1 to Vridhachalam for the Adipuram festival, promising to send her back in two or three days. But she never came back. Enquiries instituted by P.W.1 revealed that she was living with the accused in a village called Eranji in Kallakurichi taluk. P.W.1 there upon in stetted complaint against the wife (C.W.1), her father and the accused for an offence under S.498, I.P.C. and for an offence under S.379, I.P.C., alleging that the jewels were taken away. The Magistrate referred the matter under S.202, Cr.P.C., and the police report was that no case under S.379, I.P.C., has been made out, though a case under S.498, I.P.C. has been made out. The Magistrate took the case on file agains
































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