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

1918 Supreme(Mad) 23

A.RAHIM
Kumaraswami Chetty – Appellant
Versus
Kuppusami Chetti – Respondent


ORDER

Abdur Rahim, J.

1. This is an application to revise an order of acquittal passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in appeal in a case in which the accused were convicted by a Second Class Magistrate of offences under Sections 147, 355 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellate Magistrate found that the charge of rioting could not be sustained upon the evidence and thereupon acquitted the accused of that offence. That acquittal, must in my opinion, stand as no sufficient reason has been made out for interference with that part of the order of the appellate Magistrate. He has acquitted the accused of charges under Sections 323 and 355 on the ground that there had been a valid composition of those offences within the meaning of Section 345 Criminal Procedure Code before the complainant laid the charge in court. There are two questions of law which arise in connection with this matter. First of all, a doubt has been expressed by Oldfield, J., who admitted this application, with regard to a decision of mine in Kanni Rowther v. Inayathalla Sahib (1915) I.L.R. 39 M. 946 in which it was laid down that it was not necessary for Section 345, Criminal Procedure Code to operate, that t





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