Sonai Mugh Vs. Queen-empress

Sonai Mugh vs Queen-empress

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Mar 30, 1900

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/854900

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/854900
Court: Kolkata
Judge: Prinsep and ;Stanley, JJ.
Decided On: Mar 30, 1900
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Chittagong Hill Tracts, Conviction of offences committed within - Appeal from--Jurisdiction of High Court to hear such appeal--Chittagong Act (XXII of I860), Section 1--Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Sections 379 and 457. -

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sonai Mugh

Respondent

Queen-empress

Legal References

Reported In: (1900)ILR27Cal654

Excerpt

chittagong hill tracts, conviction of offences committed within - appeal from--jurisdiction of high court to hear such appeal--chittagong act (xxii of i860), section 1--penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 379 and 457. - prinsep and stanley, jj.1. by act xxii of 1860, section 1, the tracts of country described in the schedule to that act and known as the chittagong hill tracts were removed from the jurisdiction of the existing civil and criminal court. consequently the court of sudder dewany adawalut had no jurisdiction to hear appeals in respect of sentences passed on conviction of offences committed within those districts. jurisdiction has not since that date been given either to the sudder court or to the high court. there is, therefore, no jurisdiction in the high court to hear this appeal. it is accordingly rejected.

Full Judgment

Prinsep and Stanley, JJ.

1. By Act XXII of 1860, Section 1, the tracts of country described in the schedule to that Act and known as the Chittagong Hill Tracts were removed from the jurisdiction of the existing Civil and Criminal Court. Consequently the Court of Sudder Dewany Adawalut had no jurisdiction to hear appeals in respect of sentences passed on conviction of offences committed within those districts. Jurisdiction has not since that date been given either to the Sudder Court or to the High Court. There is, therefore, no jurisdiction in the High Court to hear this appeal. It is accordingly rejected.

Same Parties Sonai Mugh vs Queen-empress Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Prinsep and ;Stanley, JJ.

Criminal