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

THAMBIAH et al. v. TENNEKOON


Thambiah Et Al., V. Tennekoon

1949 Present : Canekeratne J.

THAMBIAH et al., Appellants, and TENNEKOON (Inspector of Police), Respondent

S. C. 365-336- M. C. Jaffna, 15,144

Charge-Several accused-Common intention-Section 32 of Penal Code-Need not be referred to in charge.

Where several accused acted with common intention it is not necessary to specify section 32 of the Penal Code in the charge framed against them.

APPEALS from a judgment of the Magistrate, Jaffna.

M. M. Kumarakulasingham, for 1st accused appellant.

H. W. Tambiah with A. P. Thurairatnam for 2nd accused appellant.

A, Mahindrarajah, Crown Counsel, for Attorney-General.

Cur. adv. vult.

May 31, 1949 CANEKERATNE J.-

At an election held about ten days before, the candidate whom the complainant zealously supported was successful ; the one favoured by the two accused persons was not. So he became the object, as the Magistrate

finds, of their resentment. When the complainant met the two accused near a junction on February 22, the second accused addressed him thus, " Are you going to work in the elections ? " and seized him. Straightaway he called upon his companion, the first accused, who had a club
















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