Skip to content
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.

Ganesh Sahu Vs. Emperor

Ganesh Sahu vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Feb 22, 1923
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/886258

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 403 - Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 411--Stolen property, several articles of, found in possession of accused--Trial in respect of some--Acquittal--Subsequent trial in respect of remaining articles, legality of. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ganesh Sahu

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Cases Referred
Ishan Muchi v. Queen
Reported In
73Ind.Cas.931

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 403 - penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 411--stolen property, several articles of, found in possession of accused--trial in respect of some--acquittal--subsequent trial in respect of remaining articles, legality of. - newbould, j.1. the petitioner in this case has been convicted under section 411, indian penal code, on the charge of having been in dishonest possession of stolen property on the 7th december 1921. it appears that on that date several articles of property were found in the room occupied by the petitioner. in respect of some of them he was prosecuted and after being convicted under section 411, indian penal code, by the trying magistrate he was acquitted on appeal. he has now been tried and convicted in respect of other properties found in his possession on the same date. there was evidence that the different articles which were the subject of the charges in the two trials were stolen from different, persons, but there is no evidence that they were received at different times. the facts of the case cannot be distinguished from those of queen-empress v. makhan 15 a. 317 : a.w.n. (1893) 101 : 7 ind. dec. (n.s.) 919 which follows the decision of a divisional bench of this court in ishan muchi v. queen-empress 15 c. 511 : 7 ind. dec. (n.s.) 925. on this authority we hold that the second trial was illegal under the provisions of section 403, criminal procedure code.2. we accordingly make this rule absolute and set aside the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner and direct that he be discharged from his bail-bond.

Full Judgment

Newbould, J.

1. The petitioner in this case has been convicted under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, on the charge of having been in dishonest possession of stolen property on the 7th December 1921. It appears that on that date several articles of property were found in the room occupied by the petitioner. In respect of some of them he was prosecuted and after being convicted under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, by the Trying Magistrate he was acquitted on appeal. He has now been tried and convicted in respect of other properties found in his possession on the same date. There was evidence that the different articles which were the subject of the charges in the two trials were stolen from different, persons, but there is no evidence that they were received at different times. The facts of the case cannot be distinguished from those of Queen-Empress v. Makhan 15 A. 317 : A.W.N. (1893) 101 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 919 which follows the decision of a Divisional Bench of this Court in Ishan Muchi v. Queen-Empress 15 C. 511 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 925. On this authority we hold that the second trial was illegal under the provisions of Section 403, Criminal Procedure Code.

2. We accordingly make this Rule absolute and set aside the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner and direct that he be discharged from his bail-bond.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial