Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Emperor Vs. Kavtik Chaitram and Narayan Baldev Palwa

Emperor vs Kavtik Chaitram and Narayan Baldev Palwa

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Feb 15, 1906
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/331227

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal References Nos. 87 and 88 of 1906
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Bombay Regulation XII of 1827, Section 27 - Notice-District Magistrate-Action with respect to suspected characters-Procedure to prove the suspected character-Assent of the person dealt with.;Before any action, under Section 27 of the Bombay Regualtion XII of 1827, can be taken against a person (1) he must be shown, ...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Emperor

Respondent

Kavtik Chaitram and Narayan Baldev Palwa

Legal References

Reported In
(1906)8BOMLR241

Excerpt

bombay regulation xii of 1827, section 27 - notice-district magistrate-action with respect to suspected characters-procedure to prove the suspected character-assent of the person dealt with.;before any action, under section 27 of the bombay regualtion xii of 1827, can be taken against a person (1) he must be shown, in accordance with legal procedre, to have been a suspeted person and (2) his assent to the measures adopted shoud be taken. - lawrence jenkins, k.c.i.e., c.j.1. narayan baldev palwa has been convicted of breach of the restriction specified in a notice issued under section 27 of bombay regulation xii of 1827, and sentenced to one day's simple imprisonment.2. the matter has been referred to us by the sessions judge and he recommends that the conviction should be reversed.3. there is nothing on the record which shows that any case had been made for action against the accused under section 27 of regulation xii. he is not shown in accordance with legal procedure to have been suspected person, and it does not appear that his assent to the measures adopted was ever taken.4. under these circumstances, we think that the sessions judge was right in the view he took of the case.5. we, therefore, reverse the conviction.

Full Judgment

Lawrence Jenkins, K.C.I.E., C.J.

1. Narayan Baldev Palwa has been convicted of breach of the restriction specified in a notice issued under Section 27 of Bombay Regulation XII of 1827, and sentenced to one day's simple imprisonment.

2. The matter has been referred to us by the Sessions Judge and he recommends that the conviction should be reversed.

3. There is nothing on the record which shows that any case had been made for action against the accused under Section 27 of Regulation XII. He is not shown in accordance with legal procedure to have been suspected person, and it does not appear that his assent to the measures adopted was ever taken.

4. Under these circumstances, we think that the Sessions Judge was right in the view he took of the case.

5. We, therefore, reverse the conviction.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial