Queen Empress Vs. Veerava

Queen Empress vs Veerava

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided May 02, 1893

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/776514

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/776514
Court: Chennai
Decided On: May 02, 1893
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

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

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Queen Empress

Respondent

Veerava

Legal References

Reported In: (1893)3MLJ241

Excerpt

- 1. under section 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 under section 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.

Full Judgment

1. Under Section 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 under Section 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.

Same Parties Queen Empress vs Veerava Same Subject Civil

Civil