Kolkata Court November 1914 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Hari Krishna Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-05-1914
Reported in: (1915)ILR42Cal784
Fletcher, J.1. The appellant before us, Hari Krishna alias Hari Misra, was tried along with three other persons before the learned Sessions Judge of Cuttack with the aid of Assessors for having committed certain offences under Section 318 and 330 of the Indian Penal Code. The Assessors came to the conclusion that none of the accused were guilty. The learned Judge, agreeing with the Assessors with regard to three of the accused, acquitted them, but disagreeing with the Assessors with regard to the appellant before us convicted him and sentenced him to undergo 18 months' rigorous imprisonment. This is the interpretation placed by the learned Judge on the opinion of the Assessors. It may, however, be said that in the opinion of one of the Assessors, its would appe(sic)al' from the record, all four accused were guilty of wrongful confinement. The appellant before us is a young man, aged about 20 years, who is said to be a student apparently studying Sanskrit with a view ultimately to becom...
Hare Krishna Alias Hari Misra Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-05-1914
Reported in: 28Ind.Cas.795
Fletcher, J.1. The appellant before us Hare Krishna alias Hari Misra was tried along with three other persons before the learned Sessions Judge of Cuttack with the aid of Assessors for having committed certain offences under Sections 348 and 330, Indian Penal Code. The Assessors came to the conclusion that none of the accused was guilty. The learned Judge, agreeing with the Assessors with regard to three of the accused, acquitted them but disagreeing with the Assessors with regard to the appellant before us convicted him and sentenced him to undergo 18 months rigorous imprisonment. This is the interpretation placed by the learned Judge on the opinion of the Assessors. It may, however, be said that in the opinion of one of the Assessors, as would appear from the record, all four accused were guilty of wrongful confinement. The appellant before us is a young man aged about 20 years who is said to be a student apparently studying Sanskrit with a view ultimately to becoming a pandit.2. The...