Skip to content


MoyzuddIn Mean Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in124Ind.Cas.70
AppellantMoyzuddIn Mean
RespondentEmperor
Cases ReferredBebhu Lal v. Emperer
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 342, applicability of, to summary trials. - mukerji, j.1. this rule must be made absolute. the petitioner was not examined under section 342, criminal procedure code. the courts below appear to have taken the view that that section is not applicable to a summary trial. in this view they are wrong, it having been held by this court that section 342 is obligatory and applies to summary trials also see bebhu lal v. emperer : air1927cal250 . the result is that the rule should be made absolute, the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner will be set aside and the case will now be re-tried by some magistrate other than the magistrate who dealt with it. the fine, if paid, will be refunded.
Judgment:

Mukerji, J.

1. This Rule must be made absolute. The petitioner was not examined under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code. The Courts below appear to have taken the view that that section is not applicable to a summary trial. In this view they are wrong, it having been held by this Court that Section 342 is obligatory and applies to summary trials also see Bebhu Lal v. Emperer : AIR1927Cal250 . The result is that the Rule should be made absolute, the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner will be set aside and the case will now be re-tried by some Magistrate other than the Magistrate who dealt with it. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.


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