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

1931 Supreme(All) 31

Mahadeo Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


ORDER

Bennet, J. - This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Ghazipur recommending that the conviction of the three applicants under S. 336, I.P.C., and sentence of fines of Rs. 30 each should be set aside. The learned Sessions Judge is under the impression that the acts found would not amount to the offence mentioned in S. 336, I.P.C. He does not consider whether they would amount to an offence under any other section He does not definitely state an opinion as to whether, he considered that the finding of fact of the Magistrate was correct or not. The circumstances of the case are that Joganand Pandey, complainant, made a report on 8tb March at 8.30a.m. that the four accused persons at about 9-30p.m., including the three applicants, had thrown bricks into his house from enmity, that several bricks had been thrown in, and that ho had gone out of his house and had seen the accused standing with bricks in their hands outside his house, and that the accused had raised their hands to throw bricks. The complainant shouted, and three witnesses came up and saw the accused, and the accused ran away. The names of the witnesses were given in the first information report, and these

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