1940 JTR(Mad) 427
1941 AIR(Mad) 681
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Lakshmana Rao, J.
In Re: Shaik Silar
Versus
Decided On : 31.10.1940
The absence of a subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam as Assistant Sessions Judge influenced the court's decision to set aside the conviction of the accused.
Appointment - Subordinate Judge - Assistant Sessions Judge - Interpretation of legal provision regarding appointment of Assistant Sessions Judge
Fact of the Case:
The immediate predecessors of the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam were appointed Assistant Sessions Judges by name and there is no subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam by designation or name as Assistant Sessions Judge
Finding of the Court:
The reference is accepted and the conviction of the accused is set aside. He will be retried according to law.
Issues: Interpretation of the legal provision regarding the appointment of Assistant Sessions Judge
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the absence of a subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam as Assistant Sessions Judge and its implications on the conviction of the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction of the accused and ordered a retrial according to law.
Appointment - Subordinate Judge - Assistant Sessions Judge - Interpretation of legal provision regarding appointment of Assistant Sessions Judge
Fact of the Case:
The immediate predecessors of the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam were appointed Assistant Sessions Judges by name and there is no subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam by designation or name as Assistant Sessions Judge
Finding of the Court:
The reference is accepted and the conviction of the accused is set aside. He will be retried according to law.
Issues: Interpretation of the legal provision regarding the appointment of Assistant Sessions Judge
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the absence of a subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam as Assistant Sessions Judge and its implications on the conviction of the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction of the accused and ordered a retrial according to law.
ORDER
Lakshmana Rao, J.
1. The immediate predecessors of the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam were appointed Assistant Sessions Judges by name and there is no subsequent order appointing the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam by designation or name as Assistant Sessions Judge The reference is therefore accepted and the conviction of the accused is set aside. He will be retried according to law.