Skip to content


C. Samuel Aaron Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1931Mad440
AppellantC. Samuel Aaron
RespondentEmperor
Excerpt:
- - but one might as well infer that a cricket captain employs his team.orderjackson, j.1. the petitioner has been fined rs. 1,000 for harbouring in cannanore certain persons from travancore and cochin who were trying to make salt out of sea water. he agrees that they stopped at his vacant hotel, and there is no doubt that he harboured them. but for a conviction under section 157, i. p.c., it must be shown that they were hired, engaged or employed, and of that there is really no evidence.2. the police-inspector p. w. 1 infers that their leader employed them; but one might as well infer that a cricket captain employs his team. it is quite possible that they were all volunteers hired, engaged and employed by no one.3. in that view of the case the conviction cannot stand; the petition is allowed and the fine ordered to be refunded.
Judgment:
ORDER

Jackson, J.

1. The petitioner has been fined Rs. 1,000 for harbouring in Cannanore certain persons from Travancore and Cochin who were trying to make salt out of sea water. He agrees that they stopped at his vacant hotel, and there is no doubt that he harboured them. But for a conviction under Section 157, I. P.C., it must be shown that they were hired, engaged or employed, and of that there is really no evidence.

2. The Police-Inspector P. W. 1 infers that their leader employed them; but one might as well infer that a cricket captain employs his team. It is quite possible that they were all volunteers hired, engaged and employed by no one.

3. In that view of the case the conviction cannot stand; the petition is allowed and the fine ordered to be refunded.


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