Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Suleman Ibrahim Nakhuda - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Reference No. 107 of 1910
Judge
Reported in(1911)13BOMLR201
AppellantEmperor
RespondentSuleman Ibrahim Nakhuda
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 215, 347--order of committal--quashwing of--point of law--practice.;an order of committal to the sessions court cannot be quashed by the high court on the ground that there is no evidence in the committing magistrate's record to sustain the charges. the committal can be quash ed on a point of law only. - indian succession act (39 of 1925), section 63: [s.b. sinha & cyriac joseph, jj] will validity - deceased, was a very wealthy person - he floated several companies - he left behind his daughters, s and j - he was suffering from various diseases including some neurological ones - for his treatment, he used to frequently visit united states of america accompanied by his wife and daughter - by reason of a will, he is said to have bequeathed.....heaton, j. 1. i agree. i cannot see that the commitment is illegal. it may be convenient or it may be indiscreet, but we are only concerned with the question of illegality. therefore, i agree with the order proposed.
Judgment:

Heaton, J.

1. I agree. I cannot see that the commitment is illegal. It may be convenient or it may be indiscreet, but we are only concerned with the question of illegality. Therefore, I agree with the order proposed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //