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: Ramasami Servai and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 07, 1909
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/809159

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
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 438 - Revision--Interference by Revision Court with commitment. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Ramasami Servai and anr.

Legal References

Reported In
5Ind.Cas.933

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 438 - revision--interference by revision court with commitment. - ordermiller, j.1. the question whether the accused who have been committed to the court of sessions were acting in concert with those who have not jet been arrested is, the sessions judge opines, obscure; but that does not seem to be a reason for quashing the commitment: nor do i think that the inconvenience, if any, which will be caused by the trial in the sessions court of the 2nd accused before the others is of serious importance.2. i will not interfere with the commitment.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Miller, J.

1. The question whether the accused who have been committed to the Court of Sessions were acting in concert with those who have not jet been arrested is, the Sessions Judge opines, obscure; but that does not seem to be a reason for quashing the commitment: nor do I think that the inconvenience, if any, which will be caused by the trial in the Sessions Court of the 2nd accused before the others is of serious importance.

2. I will not interfere with the commitment.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Ramasami Servai and anr. vs Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Miller, J.
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