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: Dyta Seetharamayya

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 20, 1925
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/807009

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: Dyta Seetharamayya

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1926Mad354

Excerpt

- orderdevadoss, j.1. this is an application to revise the order of the first glass bench magistrate of bapatla. two of the magistrates found the accused guilty under section 352, indian penal code, but the chairman of the bench wrote a dissenting judgment holding that the accused was not guilty. no reasons were given for finding the accused guilty and, therefore, there is no judgment as required by law, i think, the conviction ought to be set aside and seeing it is a petty ease, it is hot worth while sending the ease back for a retrial. the fine, if paid, will be refunded. i must here indicate my view, that, in cases wherever the chairman of the bench magistrates is opposed to the majority and where he is not prepared to write a judgment for the majority, one of the magistrates ought to be asked to write the judgment. otherwise the chairman, if he happens to differ from the majority would write only his view of the case, whether it be for conviction or acquittal; and the rest of the magistrates would not be in a position to place on paper their reasons for their opinion. in such cases the rule ought to be that, where the chairman is opposed to the majority of the bench, one of the majority ought to be asked to write the judgment and that should form part of the record so that the court in revision may know the reasons for the opinion of the majority.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Devadoss, J.

1. This is an application to revise the order of the First Glass Bench Magistrate of Bapatla. Two of the Magistrates found the accused guilty under Section 352, Indian Penal Code, but the Chairman of the Bench wrote a dissenting judgment holding that the accused was not guilty. No reasons were given for finding the accused guilty and, therefore, there is no judgment as required by law, I think, the conviction ought to be set aside and seeing it is a petty ease, it is Hot worth while sending the ease back for a retrial. The fine, if paid, will be refunded. I must here indicate my view, that, in cases wherever the Chairman of the Bench Magistrates is opposed to the majority and where he is not prepared to write a judgment for the majority, one of the Magistrates ought to be asked to write the judgment. Otherwise the Chairman, if he happens to differ from the majority would write only his view of the case, whether it be for conviction or acquittal; and the rest of the Magistrates would not be in a position to place on paper their reasons for their opinion. In such cases the rule ought to be that, where the Chairman is opposed to the majority of the Bench, one of the majority ought to be asked to write the judgment and that should form part of the record so that the Court in revision may know the reasons for the opinion of the majority.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial