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

1925 Supreme(All) 32

SULAIMAN
Ram Charan – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sulaiman, J. - This is a criminal revision from an order dismissing an appeal in a Section 110 case. The accused, along with several other persons was tried, u/s 110 of the Criminal P.C. After the evidence of a number of prosecution witnesses including civil and military officers had been recorded, the accused was asked by the Magistrate why he should not be bound down. The reply of the accused was:

I have no objection. I shall furnish security. I have never been convicted before. I shall produce no defence evidence. I have no witnesses.

2. The Magistrate however examined more witnesses and did not take the statement to be a plea of guilty. He held on the evidence that a good case had been made out for an order under that section. The accused appealed to the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge dealing with the case of this particular applicant remarked as follows:

There is no force in the appeal of Ram Charan, Yadram and Bhabhuti inasmuch as all three of them expressed their willingness to furnish security for their good behaviour and produced no defence. This was tantamount to a plea of guilty after evidence of several witnesses had been recorded against the appellants

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