Skip to content


In Re: Vemireddy Babu Reddy - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1918Mad591(1); 39Ind.Cas.309
AppellantIn Re: Vemireddy Babu Reddy
Cases ReferredRash Mohun Goshamy v. Kali Nath Raha
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 517 - order, time of making of--inquiry, fresh, whether necessary. - .....there is nothing in the code which requires that the passing of the summary order under section 517 [which order ought to be made at the time of the passing of the judgment in the criminal case itself: rash mohun goshamy v. kali nath raha 19 w.r. 3 should follow a fresh inquiry after giving opportunity to the party to produce new or further evidence.3. i, therefore, decline to interfere.
Judgment:
ORDER

Sadasiva Aiyar, J.

1. The Sub-Magistrate probably acted under a wrong Section (523 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) instead of under the proper section which seems to be applicable, namely, Section 517. But I do not think that that is a sufficient ground for interference in revision if the order can be supported under the latter section.

2. The Magistrate had before him the evidence given for the prosecution in the inquiry and there is nothing in the Code which requires that the passing of the summary order under Section 517 [which order ought to be made at the time of the passing of the judgment in the criminal case itself: Rash Mohun Goshamy v. Kali Nath Raha 19 W.R. 3 should follow a fresh inquiry after giving opportunity to the party to produce new or further evidence.

3. I, therefore, decline to interfere.


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