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

1961 Supreme(All) 12

D.P.UNIYAL, KAILASH PRASAD
RAM SWARUP – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.N.Misra, S.N.Mulla, SUSHIL KUMAR


UNIYAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS reference raises an important question with regard to the true scope and effect of Section 116 (d) Cr. P. C. (Amendment) Act XXVI of 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act.

( 2 ) THE facts are briefly stated as follows. The appellant was prosecuted under Sections 409 and 477-A I. P. C. The trial of the accused commenced on 17-10-55 in the court of Sri Onkar Singh, sessions Judge of Pilibhit, with the aid of assessors. After a substantial part of the prosecution evidence had been recorded the accused came up in Revision to the High Court and obtained the stay of further proceedings in the case. The Revision was dismissed sometime in July 1959 and the case was then sent back to the Sessions Judge for trial. During the pendency of the said revision, however, two events had. occurred; one was the coming into force on. 2-1-50 of the cr. P. C. (Amendment) Act XXVI of 1955, and the other was the posting of Sri Visheshwari Pd. Mathur as Sessions Judge in place of Sri Onkar Singh since transferred. This time the trial of the accused commenced before the new Sessions Judge without the aid of assessors in accordance with the Amending Act. The Sessions Judge ev































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