High CourtsDivision Bench(1929) 02 MAD CK 0006

In Re: Tirumana Goundan and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 28 February 1929 · Citation: 116 Ind. Cas. 366

HON’BLE JUDGES
Waller, J · Krishnan Pandalai, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 73 words
1.

We concur in the view expressed in W.R.T. Forbes Vs. Mahammad Ali Haidar Khan and Another, and Emperor Vs. Khushal Jeram, , 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.