Skip to content


Subramania Maistry and anr. Vs. Nachiar Ammal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1931Mad233
AppellantSubramania Maistry and anr.
RespondentNachiar Ammal
Cases ReferredIn Nurudin Sheikh Adam v. Emperor A.I.R.
Excerpt:
- - where a case is hotly contested it is questionable whether a magistrate is well advised to try it summarily......to record any evidence at all, and that therefore there is no test by which the substantiality of its record can be gauged, i think it is right to assume that the matter rests with the court. this is the view taken by devadoss, j., in in re: chockalinga pandaram a.i.r. 1928 mad. 597. in nurudin sheikh adam v. emperor a.i.r. 1928 bom. 433 the substance of the defence evidence was not even attempted to be given. in the circumstances i am not prepared to interfere. where a case is hotly contested it is questionable whether a magistrate is well advised to try it summarily.2. the petition is dismissed.
Judgment:
ORDER

Jackson, J.

1. The point raised in this petition is whether the substance of the evidence in Section 264(1), Criminal P.C., must be such a complete summary of the evidence as to afford material for appeal or merely a statement of the evidence which the Court thinks substantial. Considering that the Court is not required to record any evidence at all, and that therefore there is no test by which the substantiality of its record can be gauged, I think it is right to assume that the matter rests with the Court. This is the view taken by Devadoss, J., in In Re: Chockalinga Pandaram A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 597. In Nurudin Sheikh Adam v. Emperor A.I.R. 1928 Bom. 433 the substance of the defence evidence was not even attempted to be given. In the circumstances I am not prepared to interfere. Where a case is hotly contested it is questionable whether a Magistrate is well advised to try it summarily.

2. The petition is dismissed.


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