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: Bommareddi Somireddi

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 02, 1910
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/805790

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
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Sections 352, 379, 447 - Conviction by Magistrate under Sections 447, 352--Conviction under Section 379 by appellate Court--Legality. - - 288. I think the conviction on appeal by the Deputy Magistrate was bad and I must set it aside.

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Bommareddi Somireddi

Legal References

Cases Referred
and Yakub All v. Lethu Thakur
Reported In
5Ind.Cas.974a

Excerpt

penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 352, 379, 447 - conviction by magistrate under sections 447, 352--conviction under section 379 by appellate court--legality. - - 288. i think the conviction on appeal by the deputy magistrate was bad and i must set it aside.orderarnold white, c.j.1. here the 1st accused was charged under sections 447 and 352 of the penal code and convicted by the stationary sub-magistrate under those sections. on appeal the deputy magistrate without expressing any opinion as to whether those convictions were right convicted the accused under section 379 of the penal code. there is no reference in the judgment of the stationary sub-magistrate to any evidence on which a charge of theft could be based and the accused had no opportunity of answering the charge of theft. the charge of theft is a distinct and separate charge and should have been separately made. if authorities are needed for this, i need only refer to the case of jatu singh v. mahbir singh 27 ca. 660 and yakub all v. lethu thakur 30 c. 288. i think the conviction on appeal by the deputy magistrate was bad and i must set it aside. i direct the magistrate to restore the appeal to his file and dispose of it according to law.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Arnold White, C.J.

1. Here the 1st accused was charged under Sections 447 and 352 of the Penal Code and convicted by the Stationary Sub-Magistrate under those sections. On appeal the Deputy Magistrate without expressing any opinion as to whether those convictions were right convicted the accused under Section 379 of the Penal Code. There is no reference in the judgment of the Stationary Sub-Magistrate to any evidence on which a charge of theft could be based and the accused had no opportunity of answering the charge of theft. The charge of theft is a distinct and separate charge and should have been separately made. If authorities are needed for this, I need only refer to the case of Jatu Singh v. Mahbir Singh 27 Ca. 660 and Yakub All v. Lethu Thakur 30 C. 288. I think the conviction on appeal by the Deputy Magistrate was bad and I must set it aside. I direct the Magistrate to restore the appeal to his file and dispose of it according to law.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial