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: Kanma Kondiah and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 26, 1923
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/809634

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.

Cattle Trespass Act (I of 1871), Section 24 - Rescuing Cattle--Driving cattle away by shouts and cries--Force or violence, whether necessary. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Kanma Kondiah and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1923Mad608; 72Ind.Cas.616

Excerpt

cattle trespass act (i of 1871), section 24 - rescuing cattle--driving cattle away by shouts and cries--force or violence, whether necessary. - orderspencer, j.1. the sub-divisional magistrate's opinion that driving cattle by shouts and cries does not constitute 'rescuing' them under section 24 of the cattle trespass act is erroneous. inducing an animal to move may even amount to using 'force' (see definition in section 349, indian penal code and illustration (h) to that section), so that, even if the magistrate is right in saying that the word 'rescue' implies the use of force or violence, it does not follow that there was no force used in this case.2. the reasons given for acquitting the accused are unsound, the acquittal is set aside, and the appeal must be re-heard and disposed of according to law.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Spencer, J.

1. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate's opinion that driving cattle by shouts and cries does not constitute 'rescuing' them under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act is erroneous. Inducing an animal to move may even amount to using 'force' (see definition in Section 349, Indian Penal Code and illustration (h) to that section), so that, even if the Magistrate is right in saying that the word 'rescue' implies the use of force or violence, it does not follow that there was no force used in this case.

2. The reasons given for acquitting the accused are unsound, the acquittal is set aside, and the appeal must be re-heard and disposed of according to law.

Continue Your Research

Same Parties In Re: Kanma Kondiah and ors. vs Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Spencer, 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