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

1918 Supreme(All) 279

PRAMADA CHARAN BANERJI
Emperor – Appellant
Versus
Maturwa – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pramada Charan Banerji, J. - The accused in this case was convicted under the Gambling Act. The Magistrate who convicted him ordered confiscation of the money which was found in his possession. The learned Sessions Judge has reported the casa to this Court with the recommendation that this portion of the learned Magistrate's order should be set aside as not being in conformity with law. It is clear from the language of Section 18 of the Gambling Act that all that could be confiscated were the instruments of gaming. This was so held in the case to which the learned Sessions Judge refers. Acceding therefore to the recommendation of the learned Sessions Judge, I set aside so much of the order of the Magistrate as directs the-confiscation of the money found in the possession of the accused and direct that it be refunded to him.

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