High Courts(1893) 05 MAD CK 0002

Queen Empress vs Veerava

Madras High Court · Decided on 2 May 1893 · Citation: (1893) 3 MLJ 241

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

6 paragraphs · 141 words
1.

u/s 487 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Magistrate whose summons was disobeyed has no jurisdiction to try the offence. The rulings

referred to by the Sub Magistrate are not in paint. The one reported at 4 M. H. C. R 52 is under Act VIII of 1866 and the one reported at 6 M.

H. C. R 44 had reference to Act III of 1869. In the case now before us the summons disobeyed was to appear as a defence witness in Calendar

Case No. 1080 of 1892 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate and there was no general prohibition as u/s 487, in the Code of 1861.

2.

The conviction is set aside and the fine will be refunded. The accused may be retried by a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try him for the

offence. Ordered accordingly.