Skip to content


Jayaram Paddickal Vs. T.V. Eachanawarriyar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal Nos. 380-381 of 1977
Judge
Reported inAIR1981SC161; (1979)4SCC803c
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 340
AppellantJayaram Paddickal
RespondentT.V. Eachanawarriyar and anr.
Excerpt:
- - 1 and 2. having appreciated and considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where we should interfere with the impugned order of the high court directing the appellant's prosecution in accordance with section 340, crpc, 1973. we would, however, like to observe that the trial should proceed according to law unfettered by the observations of the high court in the impugned judgment or any findings recorded therein because they were only meant to find out whether if was expedient to order the prosecution of the appellant.n.l. untwalia, j.1. heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents nos. 1 and 2. having appreciated and considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where we should interfere with the impugned order of the high court directing the appellant's prosecution in accordance with section 340, crpc, 1973. we would, however, like to observe that the trial should proceed according to law unfettered by the observations of the high court in the impugned judgment or any findings recorded therein because they were only meant to find out whether if was expedient to order the prosecution of the appellant. none of these observations or findings could mean or can be taken into account as conclusive at this.....
Judgment:

N.L. Untwalia, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Having appreciated and considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where we should interfere with the impugned order of the High Court directing the appellant's prosecution in accordance with Section 340, CrPC, 1973. We would, however, like to observe that the trial should proceed according to law unfettered by the observations of the High Court in the impugned judgment or any findings recorded therein because they were only meant to find out whether if was expedient to order the prosecution of the appellant. None of these observations or findings could mean or can be taken into account as conclusive at this stage of the trial. The appeals are dismissed subject to these observations.


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