Skip to content


In Re: Tirumana Goundan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in116Ind.Cas.366
AppellantIn Re: Tirumana Goundan and anr.
Cases Referred and Khushal Jeram v. Emperor
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 583 - mandatory provision of law, omission to comply with, effect of. - order1. we concur in the view expressed in forbes v. muhammad ali haider khan : air1925cal1246 and khushal jeram v. emperor : air1926bom534 , that failure to comply with a mandatory provision of law is not necessarily an illegality that vitiates the proceedings. the question is whether the failure has been prejudicial to the accused. we see no reason to conclude that it has been prejudicial in this instance.2. the petition is dismissed.
Judgment:
ORDER

1. We concur in the view expressed in Forbes v. Muhammad Ali Haider Khan : AIR1925Cal1246 and Khushal Jeram v. Emperor : AIR1926Bom534 , that failure to comply with a mandatory provision of law is not necessarily an illegality that vitiates the proceedings. The question is whether the failure has been prejudicial to the accused. We see no reason to conclude that it has been prejudicial in this instance.

2. The petition is dismissed.


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