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

1922 Supreme(Mad) 142

OLDFIELD
A. T. Sankaralinga Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
Narayana Mudaliar – Respondent


ORDER

Walter Salis Schwabe Kt., K.C., C.J.

1. This is a criminal revision petition against the acquittal of the accused on a charge of murder, in a case tried by the, Sessions Judge of Tinnevelly. The ground and the only ground on which we are asked to order a retrial is that the learned Judge did not deliver in Court his full reasons for acquitting the accused. At the end of a three weeks trial he left certain specific questions to the assessors. The assessors agreed that the accused were not guilty and, in answer to a specific question, they agreed that certain witnesses for the prosecution, who were the principal witnesses, were not worthy of belief. The acting Sessions judge then wrote a document headed "Judgment" setting forth the findings of the assessors and adding his own finding agreeing with the assessors that the accused were not guilty and they were acquitted. At a later date he wrote and prefixed to that judgment a full reasoned judgment dealing with the various points raised, the classes of witnesses and the reasons he had for believing or disbelieving those witnesses. It is agreed that that is not complying with the terms of Sections 366 and 367 of the Code of Criminal










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