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

1952 Supreme(Ori) 72

JAGANNADHA DAS, NARASIMHAM
Kalinga Tubes – Appellant
Versus
D. Suri – Respondent


Advocates:
K. Patnaik, for Petitioners; Advocate-General and A.M. Chatterjee, for Opposite Party.

Judgement

JAGANNADHA DAS, C. J. :- These applications were previously heard on the 21st and 22nd of October and we pronounced orders on 27-10-52 (See AIR 1953 ORISSA 49) granting to the applicants one of the prayers which they made in their applications viz., a direction for the issue of copies of certain documents, which the learned Magistrate held the applicants not to be entitled to. We felt that in the light of the additional material that may be available to the applicants on getting those copies it would be desirable to hear further arguments with reference to the legality of the searches which was the second question that was raised. We accordingly directed that the applications should be posted for further hearing. They have therefore come up again before us and we proceed to consider the question of the legality of the searches.

2. It is necessary to note at the outset that when the applications were first heard on the 21st October, the advocate for the petitioners sought to put forward an additional ground of fact said to have a bearing on the legality of the searches. A petition raising it was filed on 17th October 1952. The additional ground was that since the searches we












































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