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: Yedama Subbaramiah

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 05, 1934
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/787155

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.

- - The warrant of arrest, the execution of which was resisted by the petitioner, is clearly an illegal one.

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Yedama Subbaramiah

Legal References

Reported In
(1934)66MLJ408

Excerpt

- - the warrant of arrest, the execution of which was resisted by the petitioner, is clearly an illegal one.orderbardswell, j.1. the conviction of the petitioner for offences punishable under sections 225-b and 353, i.p.c. and the sentences therefor must be set aside. the warrant of arrest, the execution of which was resisted by the petitioner, is clearly an illegal one. the warrant of arrest was signed by the deputy nazir, an officer who had not been empowered legally or given any lawful authority to sign warrants, and the fact that it had been the practice for a considerable time for such warrants to be signed by the deputy nazir cannot make the signing of them by that officer legal in the absence of due authorisation. the petitioner who has been admitted to bail is acquitted and set at liberty and his bail bond will be discharged.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Bardswell, J.

1. The conviction of the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 225-B and 353, I.P.C. and the sentences therefor must be set aside. The warrant of arrest, the execution of which was resisted by the petitioner, is clearly an illegal one. The warrant of arrest was signed by the Deputy Nazir, an officer who had not been empowered legally or given any lawful authority to sign warrants, and the fact that it had been the practice for a considerable time for such warrants to be signed by the Deputy Nazir cannot make the signing of them by that officer legal in the absence of due authorisation. The petitioner who has been admitted to bail is acquitted and set at liberty and his bail bond will be discharged.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Yedama Subbaramiah 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