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

1958 Supreme(All) 130

A.N.MULLA
M. H. ALEXANDER – Appellant
Versus
CLAIRA ALEXANDER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Akramuddin Ahmad, C.P.JOHN

A. N. MULLA, J.

( 1 ) THE facts which led to the filing of this application of criminal revision are as follows.

( 2 ) SMT. Claira Alexander is the married wife of Sri M. H. Alexander. They were married several years ago and they were also parents of some children. On 19-8-1957 Smt. Claira Alexander filed a complaint under Section 494. P. C. against her husband and Smt. Karuna Kumari alleging that they entered into a bigamous marriage. This complaint was filed in the court of a Judicial Officer at Lucknow. The complaint did not disclose as to when and where the bigamous marriage was performed. Smt. Claira Alexander was examined on 26-8-1957 under Section 200 Cr. P. C. by the Magistrate and even in this statement she gave no information about the date and the place where this alleged bigamous marriage was performed. It is therefore surprising how this complaint was entertained at all. Courts entertain complaints when they are satisfied not that an offence has been committed but that an offence has been committed within their jurisdiction. It is necessary for a court to satisfy itself on this point before entertaining a complaint. It appears that this was not done by the Magistrate.
















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