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

1961 Supreme(Online)(AP) 12

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Unknown, Unknown
In re Pasupulati Nanjappa


1. The Additional Sessions Judge of Cuddapah received C. A. No. 71 of 1960 filed i.e., presented by an appellant (P. Nanjappa) against his conviction and sentence by Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Cuddapah and disposed it off by setting aside the conviction and sentence and remanding the case for retrial. The same appellant filed Cri. R.C. 372 of 1960 against that judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge.

2. The Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam heard C. A. No. 269 of 1959 against conviction and sentence by Judicial II Class Magistrate, Sompeta. A preliminary objection was raised by Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade I, Srikakulam, that an Additional Sessions Judge was not competent to receive an appeal and that, therefore, the appeal (which had been received and admitted by the Additional Sessions Judge) was liable to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The learned Additional Sessions Judge upheld the objection and, accordingly, returned the appeal for presentation to the proper court. The correctness and validity of that order is the subject matter of Cr. R. C. No. 457 of 1960.
The common question of law which arose in the two cases and which has been argued before us is



















































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