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: Kuppini Naicken

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Aug 01, 1934
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/784335

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: Kuppini Naicken

Legal References

Reported In
155Ind.Cas.694; (1935)68MLJ493

Excerpt

- pandrang row, j.1. i concur in the view of the district magistrate that a second class magistrate is not competent to pass a sentence of imprisonment for breach of an order under section 488 of the code of criminal procedure directing payment of maintenance. even assuming that the words ' any magistrate ' in section 490 of the code of criminal procedure have not been used with reference to the class of magisirates referred to in sections 488 and 489 of the code of criminal procedure the power to enforce an order of maintenance does not necessarily include the power to sentence the person against whom it was passed to imprisonment. the order of the second class magistrate, coimbatore, dated 8th december, 1933, is therefore set aside.

Full Judgment

Pandrang Row, J.

1. I concur in the view of the District Magistrate that a Second Class Magistrate is not competent to pass a sentence of imprisonment for breach of an order under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing payment of maintenance. Even assuming that the words ' any Magistrate ' in Section 490 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have not been used with reference to the class of Magisirates referred to in Sections 488 and 489 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the power to enforce an order of maintenance does not necessarily include the power to sentence the person against whom it was passed to imprisonment. The order of the Second Class Magistrate, Coimbatore, dated 8th December, 1933, is therefore set aside.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Kuppini Naicken 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