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: Varayal Krishnan Nair

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 15, 1912
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/809550

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
Civil

Case Summary

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

Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Sections 109, 379 - Theft--Accused not convicted of theft--Whether can be convicted for abetment of theft. -

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Varayal Krishnan Nair

Legal References

Reported In
14Ind.Cas.319

Excerpt

penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 109, 379 - theft--accused not convicted of theft--whether can be convicted for abetment of theft. - sankaran nair, j.1. the petitioner was charged only with having committed theft. he was convicted under section 379 for that offence. on appeal, he was acquitted of theft and convicted of abetment of theft under sections 109 and 379 of the indian penal code. this is illegal, as the petitioner was not charged with the abetment of theft. the conviction and sentence are set aside and the fine will be refunded.

Full Judgment

Sankaran Nair, J.

1. The petitioner was charged only with having committed theft. He was convicted under Section 379 for that offence. On appeal, he was acquitted of theft and convicted of abetment of theft under Sections 109 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. This is illegal, as the petitioner was not charged with the abetment of theft. The conviction and sentence are set aside and the fine will be refunded.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Varayal Krishnan Nair vs Same Subject Civil Same Judge Sankaran Nair, J.
Civil

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