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

1956 Supreme(Mad) 400

SOMASUNDARAM, RAMASWAMI GOUNDER
In re, Palanisamy Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S. Sivakaminathan, for Petitioner; Advocate-General for public Prosecutor, for the State.

Judgement

RAMASWAMI GOUNDER, J. :- This revision is posted before this Bench as it was considered that grounds 6 and 7 taken in the Memorandum of the Criminal Revision Petition raised important questions. The petitioner was convicted by the Sub-Magistrate of Kumbakonam on a charge under S. 323, I. P. C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 15. There was an appeal as against that conviction and sentence, heard by the District Magistrate, Kumbakonam, as Assistant Sessions Judge, and dismissed by him. This revision is filed against that order of dismissal, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Sub-Magistrate. Under the old S. 407, Cr. P. C., any person convicted on a trial held by any Magistrate, II or III class, was allowed to appeal to the District Magistrate; but, by the amending Act XXVI of 1955, which came into force from 1-1-1956, that section was deleted and the old S. 408 amended, providing that any person convicted on a trial by a District Magistrate or any other Magistrate may appeal to the Court of Session; and S. 409 as amended provides that an appeal to the Court of Session shall be heard by the Sessions Judge or by an Additional Sessions Judge or an Assistant Se



















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