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

1953 Supreme(Ori) 40

PANIGRAHI
RUSI BISWAL – Appellant
Versus
NAKHYATRAMALINI DEVI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.B.MOHANTY, R.K.PATNAIK, S.MOHANTY

PANIGRAHI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision directed against an order of Sri M. A. Khan, Magistrate First class, Jajpur, dated 31-12-52, whereby he examined an accused person under section 342, Cr. P. C. , after the examination of the defence witnesses had been completed. The petitioner is the complainant in a case under Sections 447 and 426 I. P. C. There were five accused persons, of whom the first accused Nakhya-tramalini Dei (. Opposite party 1) is a purdanashia lady. She was being represented at the trial by 'mukhetear, M. M. Jena, and her personal attendance was dispensed with under section 205, Cr. P. C. On 17-10-52, the Mukhtear was examined on her behalf. But unfortunately, it appears that he did not sign the statement he made under section 342. The case was posted to 30-12-52, for the examination of defence witnesses and some of them were examined on that date. The case came up for arguments on the next day, namely, 31-12-52. On that day, it was brought to the notice of the court that the Mukhtear had not signed the statement under Section 342, Cr. P. C. It appears that the Mukhtear had died on 11-11-52 and this fact also was brought to the notice of the Court on 31-12-52.








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