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

1925 Supreme(All) 29

DANIELS
Mustaqimuddin – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Daniels, J. - This is an application in revision in a case in which sureties' bonds have been ordered to be forfeited u/s 514, Criminal P.C. Two points of law are raised: (1) That the bonds were given for attendance in the Court of the Cantonment Magistrate and that the liabilities of the sureties came to an end when the case was transferred to another Court. (2) That on 22nd September the Magistrate passed an order directing the accused in the case to give security for three years, but allowed him ten days' time, up to 3rd October, to file security. It was on this latter date that he absconded. The applicant contends that his liability came to an end on 22nd September.

2. Owing to a change in the law the Court of the Cantonment Magistrate ceased to exist in March 1924; and it appears from the Magistrate's order that all cases from that Court were transferred to the Court of B. Jai Narain, Special Magistrate. In my opinion the terms of the security bond given in Form No. 42 of the Fifth Schedule to the Criminal P.C. are wide enough to include the successor of the Court in which the cage originally was. Any other view of the law would produce most inconvenient results, since

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