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: Ambalam Ibrahi and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Aug 20, 1918
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/777280

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: Ambalam Ibrahi and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
(1918)35MLJ401

Excerpt

- order1. this must be taken as a petition of revision directed solely against the order of the tahsildar magistrate refusing to give a copy of the magistrate's judgment, the refusal having been based on the ground that the petitioner ought to pay eight annas search fees along with his application for copy under the board's standing order no. 173.2. the application for copy was made to the officer as a magistrate (a criminal court) by an accused convicted by him and the board's standing order has absolutely no relevancy to such an application. an application of that kind is governed by rule 188 of the criminal rules of practice framed by the high court under the powers vested in the high court by section 554, sub-section 2 clause (e) of the criminal procedure code.3. the magistrate is therefore directed to give the copy applied for without further delay. a. v. v.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. This must be taken as a petition of revision directed solely against the order of the Tahsildar magistrate refusing to give a copy of the magistrate's judgment, the refusal having been based on the ground that the petitioner ought to pay eight annas search fees along with his application for copy under the Board's Standing Order No. 173.

2. The application for copy was made to the officer as a magistrate (a Criminal Court) by an accused convicted by him and the Board's Standing Order has absolutely no relevancy to such an application. An application of that kind is governed by Rule 188 of the Criminal Rules of Practice framed by the High Court under the powers vested in the High Court by Section 554, Sub-section 2 Clause (e) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

3. The magistrate is therefore directed to give the copy applied for without further delay. A. V. V.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Ambalam Ibrahi and ors. 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