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: Penubolu Subbaramiah and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 27, 1942
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/797976

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: Penubolu Subbaramiah and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1942Mad451; (1942)1MLJ489

Excerpt

- orderhorwill, j.1. it has been repeatedly laid down that the proper stage at which to apply for a copy of a witness's statement is at the beginning of the cross-examination. this was apparently done by the counsel for the accused; and so the magistrate was bound to grant the application.2. this method however, if strictly followed, would lead to interminable delays. in practice, copies are either granted in advance or the court reads out the relevant part of the accused's statement or the vakil is allowed to look into the diary. in the last two cases, copies must still be furnished if required; but the examination of witnesses need not be held up while this is being done.3. some co-operation between the counsel and the court is necessary to make section 162, criminal procedure code work smoothly.4. the petition is allowed and the magistrate ordered to furnish the copies prayed for.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Horwill, J.

1. It has been repeatedly laid down that the proper stage at which to apply for a copy of a witness's statement is at the beginning of the cross-examination. This was apparently done by the counsel for the accused; and so the Magistrate was bound to grant the application.

2. This method however, if strictly followed, would lead to interminable delays. In practice, copies are either granted in advance or the Court reads out the relevant part of the accused's statement or the vakil is allowed to look into the diary. In the last two cases, copies must still be furnished if required; but the examination of witnesses need not be held up while this is being done.

3. Some co-operation between the counsel and the Court is necessary to make Section 162, Criminal Procedure Code work smoothly.

4. The petition is allowed and the Magistrate ordered to furnish the copies prayed for.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial