Skip to content


Tirloki Nath Vs. King-emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1927All742
AppellantTirloki Nath
RespondentKing-emperor
Excerpt:
- - 1. one banwari lal complained against tirloki nath, under section 352 i. 2. neither the accused's father nor the complainant's son were parties to the case and i fail to see how any magistrate could have acted in the way that this learned magistrate did......to decide a case in the way that this magistrate did. i accept the reference. as the case is a trivial one i direct the record to be returned. no further action need be taken in the.....
Judgment:

Banerji, J.

1. One Banwari Lal complained against Tirloki Nath, under Section 352 I.P.C. The case was tried summarily by the District Magistrate of Meerut, but the proceedings adopted by him are curious. What he says in his judgment is:

Accused's father says that if complainant swears on Ganges water that he has not abused his father the case is finished.

2. Neither the accused's father nor the complainant's son were parties to the case and I fail to see how any Magistrate could have acted in the way that this learned Magistrate did. There is no provision of any law, and it seems to me against common-sense, to decide a case in the way that this Magistrate did. I accept the reference. As the case is a trivial one I direct the record to be returned. No further action need be taken in the matter.


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