Skip to content
Try for free
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.
See full guide →

In Re: Kamhala Narayan

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 24, 1919
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/775028

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

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

Citation
Court
Chennai
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

-

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Kamhala Narayan

Legal References

Reported In
(1919)36MLJ452

Excerpt

- 1. it does not appear that the sessions judge has followed the directions contained in section 309 of the criminal procedure code which require him to give judgment after recording the opinion of the assessors, to convict if he finds the accused guilty and to pass sentence according to law.2. the circumstances that in this case, the accused is charged in the same trial with another offence triable by jury (section 269, clause 3) of the code of criminal procedure, that the judge disagrees with the verdict of the jury on that charge and desires to make a reference under section 307 of the criminal procedure code, do not, in our opinion, absolve the sessions judge from complying with the requirements of section 309, as regards the offence tried by him with assessors.3. the reference is therefore premature and we shall send back the case to the learned sessions judge to rectify the irregularity and then act according to law.

Full Judgment

1. It does not appear that the Sessions Judge has followed the directions contained in Section 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code which require him to give judgment after recording the opinion of the assessors, to convict if he finds the accused guilty and to pass sentence according to Law.

2. The circumstances that in this case, the accused is charged in the same trial with another offence triable by Jury (Section 269, Clause 3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that the Judge disagrees with the verdict of the Jury on that charge and desires to make a reference under Section 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code, do not, in our opinion, absolve the Sessions Judge from complying with the requirements of Section 309, as regards the offence tried by him with assessors.

3. The reference is therefore premature and we shall send back the case to the learned Sessions Judge to rectify the irregularity and then act according to law.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Kamhala Narayan vs Same Subject Criminal
Criminal

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales