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

1935 Supreme(All) 15

Mohru Lal – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Cawnpore of the case of King-Emperor v. Mohru Lal under Sections 408-409, I.P.C., on the ground that the Magistrate of Cawnpore has no jurisdiction to try this case. The charge as actually framed by the Magistrate is that Mohru Lal, between the dates of 10th May and 18th December 1934, being a factor of broker, servant or agent of Matadin Bhagwan Das, did commit criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 19,013-5-9 and committed an offence under Sections 408-409, I.P.C. The Magistrate has omitted to put the place of occurrence of the offence. For the accused it is contended that the allegations of the complainant amount to a charge of a commission of an offence somewhere in Bengal and that the Cawnpore Court has no jurisdiction to try such an offence.

2. For the complainant the allegation is that the offence can be enquired into in Cawnpore and that the Cawnpore Court has jurisdiction. The allegations in the complaint are that the accused was engaged in Cawnpore as an agent of the firm of Matadin Bhagwan Das, Sugar Merchants of Cawnpore, and that the accused was sent to Bengal with instructions to effect deliveries of s

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