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

1964 Supreme(All) 334

S. CHANDRA
Krishna Mohan Kulshrestha – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Gur Dayal Srivastava, Advocate, for the Applicant; A.G.A, for the Opposite Party

JUDGMENT

S. Chandra, J. - Krishna Mohan Kulshrestha is a practising lawyer. He filed a complain under Section 500, I.P.C. During the course of the hearing of this complaint case a female witness, Km. Chand by name was put in the witness box. The counsel for the defence wanted to bring out from this lady witness the fact that she had been brought to the court by the complainant himself and not by Jwala Prasad. In this connection the defence counsel while cross examining the lady witness put a question to her and requested the court to call Jwala Prasad from outside the court. The learned Magistrate asked the defence counsel to make an application for calling Jwala Prasad and directed that further cross examination of the witness shall take place after lunch. The learned Magistrate thereafter intended to rise for lunch. At this point of time the lawyer complainant said that great injustice was being done. The learned Magistrate asked the applicant not to use such words. Thereupon the applicant said and repeated it, in a louder and stronger tone that great injustice is being done and that the courts are meant for doing justice, injustice should not be committed.

2. At this the learned

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