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

1964 Supreme(Ori) 71

R.L.NARASIMHAM
ARJUN PADHY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.C.MISRA, Y.S.N.MURTY

R. L. NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision petition against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge of ganjam, declining to entertain an appeal under Section 520, Cr. P. C. , against that portion of the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Chatrapur in G. R. Case No. S86/60 directing delivery of three material objects M. Os. I, II and III (handas) to the complainant R. S. Panigrahi, after acquitting the accused persons in that case. The learned Additional Sessions Judge thought that there was no right of appeal under Section 520, Cr. P. C. , in view of the decision of this High Court reported in sharfuddin v. Sirajuddin, AIR 1961 Orissa 121. It was urged before him and also reiterated before me that the said Orissa decision was itself based on Talewar Jha v. Mool Chand, AIR 1959 All 96, which has been overruled by a subsequent division Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court reported in Ram Abhilak v. State, AIR 1981 All 544. Mr. Murty urged that the same view has been taken in shantaram Govind v. State, AIR 1901 Madh Pra 1 and in Kanchanlal Somalal v. State, AIR 1963 Guj 223. But he fairly cited before me a decision of the Punjab high Court reported in Sheo Dan v






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