Skip to content


In Re: D.H. Satyam - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in1949CriLJ68; (1948)2MLJ114
AppellantIn Re: D.H. Satyam
Excerpt:
- ordergovinda menon, j.1. i do not see any justification for admitting the revision simply on the ground that the order of acquittal was pronounced on sunday. though rule (1) of the criminal rules of practice states that no judicial work should be transacted on sunday, it does not mean that the court has no jurisdiction to acquit an accused on sunday and release him from custody. the rule provides for cases of absolute urgency. even if the pronouncing of the order of acquittal may not be one of absolute urgency i do not feel that this by itself will justify my interference in revision. this revision petition is therefore dismissed.
Judgment:
ORDER

Govinda Menon, J.

1. I do not see any justification for admitting the revision simply on the ground that the order of acquittal was pronounced on Sunday. Though Rule (1) of the Criminal Rules of practice states that no judicial work should be transacted on Sunday, it does not mean that the Court has no jurisdiction to acquit an accused on Sunday and release him from custody. The rule provides for cases of absolute urgency. Even if the pronouncing of the order of acquittal may not be one of absolute urgency I do not feel that this by itself will justify my interference in revision. This revision petition is therefore dismissed.


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