Srish Chandra Mukerjee Vs. Emperor

Srish Chandra Mukerjee vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided May 14, 1909

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/875723

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/875723
Court: Kolkata
Judge: Lawrence Jenkins, C.J. and ;Mookerjee, J.
Decided On: May 14, 1909
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 233 - Charge--Cheating complainant on three different occasions--One Count, bad in law. -

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Srish Chandra Mukerjee

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Cases Referred: Johan v. King
Reported In: 4Ind.Cas.16

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 233 - charge--cheating complainant on three different occasions--one count, bad in law. - 1. on the authority of the two cases cited gul mahomed sircar v. ckeharu mandal 10 c.w.n. 53; 3 cr. l.j. 141; johan v. king-emperor 10 c.w.n. 520; 2 c.l.j. 618; 3 cr. l.j. 111 we hold that the charge in this case is bad. the only question is whether we should send back the case for re-trial. we think, in the circumstances it would be highly unprofitable to do so, and specially having regard to the evidence brought to our notice and to the statement elicited from girish chunder ghosh in re-examination.2. the result is that we set aside the conviction and sentence, and order that the fine be refunded if already paid.

Full Judgment

1. On the authority of the two cases cited Gul Mahomed Sircar v. Ckeharu Mandal 10 C.W.N. 53; 3 Cr. L.J. 141; Johan v. King-Emperor 10 C.W.N. 520; 2 C.L.J. 618; 3 Cr. L.J. 111 we hold that the charge in this case is bad. The only question is whether we should send back the case for re-trial. We think, in the circumstances it would be highly unprofitable to do so, and specially having regard to the evidence brought to our notice and to the statement elicited from Girish Chunder Ghosh in re-examination.

2. The result is that we set aside the conviction and sentence, and order that the fine be refunded if already paid.

Same Parties Srish Chandra Mukerjee vs Emperor Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Lawrence Jenkins, C.J. and ;Mookerjee, J.

Criminal