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.

In Re: Ippili Magatha and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Nov 21, 1919
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/783753

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
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: Ippili Magatha and anr.

Legal References

Reported In
(1920)38MLJ27

Excerpt

- order1. we are unable to agree with the learned sessions judge that the present case is covered by in the matter of ramaya naika i.l.r. (1903) m. 419. what was decided by the full bench in that case was that the word assistance in the first portion of the section must be read as being ejusdem generis with the same word occurring in the latter portion of the section. in the present case, the accused were called upon to assist the salt inspector in making a search. under section 103 of the code of criminal procedure, he is authorized to call upon the villagers to assist him in the execution of that duty. the last sentence of clause (2) of section 103 suggests that while the rendering of assistance in making the search is imperative on the persons called upon to assist, they are not compellable by the inspector to attend the court to give evidence without a summons in that behalf. therefore the duty for discharging which these accused were requisitioned by the inspector was ejusdem generis with that mentioned in the second clause; consequently, the refusal of the accused to assist the inspector is an offence punishable under section 187 i.p.c. the conviction is therefore right. the papers will be returned.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. We are unable to agree with the learned Sessions Judge that the present case is covered by In the matter of Ramaya Naika I.L.R. (1903) M. 419. What was decided by the Full Bench in that case was that the word assistance in the first portion of the section must be read as being ejusdem generis with the same word occurring in the latter portion of the section. In the present case, the accused were called upon to assist the Salt Inspector in making a search. Under Section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he is authorized to call upon the villagers to assist him in the execution of that duty. The last sentence of Clause (2) of Section 103 suggests that while the rendering of assistance in making the search is imperative on the persons called upon to assist, they are not compellable by the Inspector to attend the Court to give evidence without a summons in that behalf. Therefore the duty for discharging which these accused were requisitioned by the Inspector was ejusdem generis with that mentioned in the second clause; consequently, the refusal of the accused to assist the Inspector is an offence punishable under Section 187 I.P.C. The conviction is therefore right. The papers will be returned.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial