Skip to content


In Re: M. Muthaya - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1916)ILR39Mad895
AppellantIn Re: M. Muthaya
Excerpt:
abkari act (madras act i of 1886), sections 56 and 64 - offence under section 56 not by licensee but by his depot-writer--conviction, legality of. - ayling, j.1. it is argued that petitioner being merely the depot-writer and not the licensee, is not liable to prosecution under section 56 of the abkari act, it has been held by a bench of this court in an unreported ease--re sudalaimuthu (1886) 1 wei cr. r. 647--that sections 64 and 56 must be read together, and that not only the licensee, but the actual offender (in this case the petitioner) is liable to prosecution for an offence under section 56. following this, we must reject petitioner's contention.2. no other ground for interference is shown. the petition is dismissed.
Judgment:

Ayling, J.

1. It is argued that petitioner being merely the depot-writer and not the licensee, is not liable to prosecution under Section 56 of the Abkari Act, It has been held by a bench of this Court in an unreported ease--Re Sudalaimuthu (1886) 1 Wei Cr. R. 647--that Sections 64 and 56 must be read together, and that not only the licensee, but the actual offender (in this case the petitioner) is liable to prosecution for an offence under Section 56. Following this, we must reject petitioner's contention.

2. No other ground for interference is shown. The petition is dismissed.


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