Skip to content


O.S. Venkatasubba Ayyar Vs. T.M. Soundraraja Ayyangar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1929Mad260
AppellantO.S. Venkatasubba Ayyar
RespondentT.M. Soundraraja Ayyangar
Excerpt:
- orderjackson, j.1. petitioner was discharged because of complainant's absence. the complaint was then taken up again and the trial proceeded and it is urged that this was illegal. if a magistrate discharges an accused because of the non-appearance of the complainant under section 259, criminal p.c., and subsequently excuses that nonappearance he must proceed de novo. none of the evidence recorded in the first can be carried over to the second case.2. in this case no evidence had been recorded. the magistrate was asked to proceed de novo, and his only irregularity lay in his failing to take a sworn statement. i cannot see that accused was prejudiced by this irregularity and dismiss the petition.
Judgment:
ORDER

Jackson, J.

1. Petitioner was discharged because of complainant's absence. The complaint was then taken up again and the trial proceeded and it is urged that this was illegal. If a Magistrate discharges an accused because of the non-appearance of the complainant under Section 259, Criminal P.C., and Subsequently excuses that nonappearance he must proceed de novo. None of the evidence recorded in the first can be carried over to the second case.

2. In this case no evidence had been recorded. The Magistrate was asked to proceed de novo, and his only irregularity lay in his failing to take a sworn statement. I cannot see that accused was prejudiced by this irregularity and dismiss the petition.


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