MoyzuddIn Mean Vs. Emperor

MoyzuddIn Mean vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Apr 10, 1929

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/883761

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/883761
Court: Kolkata
Judge: Mukerji, J.
Decided On: Apr 10, 1929
Subject: Arbitration

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 342, applicability of, to summary trials. -

Key legal issue: Arbitration

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MoyzuddIn Mean

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Cases Referred: Bebhu Lal v. Emperer
Reported In: 124Ind.Cas.70

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 342, applicability of, to summary trials. - mukerji, j.1. this rule must be made absolute. the petitioner was not examined under section 342, criminal procedure code. the courts below appear to have taken the view that that section is not applicable to a summary trial. in this view they are wrong, it having been held by this court that section 342 is obligatory and applies to summary trials also see bebhu lal v. emperer : air1927 cal250 . the result is that the rule should be made absolute, the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner will be set aside and the case will now be re-tried by some magistrate other than the magistrate who dealt with it. the fine, if paid, will be refunded.

Full Judgment

Mukerji, J.

1. This Rule must be made absolute. The petitioner was not examined under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code. The Courts below appear to have taken the view that that section is not applicable to a summary trial. In this view they are wrong, it having been held by this Court that Section 342 is obligatory and applies to summary trials also see Bebhu Lal v. Emperer : AIR1927 Cal250 . The result is that the Rule should be made absolute, the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner will be set aside and the case will now be re-tried by some Magistrate other than the Magistrate who dealt with it. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.

Same Parties MoyzuddIn Mean vs Emperor Same Subject Arbitration Same Judge Mukerji, J.

Arbitration