Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges

    Ganeswar Paharaj Accused v. King-Emperor Opposite Party.

    1. The rule must be made absolute. The Munsif in a proceeding under section 476 of the Cr PC, against the petitioner refused be allow the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses examined on behalf of the opposite party. He had obviously no right to do so. The accused was called upon to show cause and he had a right to place his case before the Court either by offering evidence on his own behalf or by cross-examining she witnesses on bebalf of the opposite party. The enquiry by the Munsif was therefore not a real enquiry and the order of the Munsif cannot be supported.

    2. Looking however into the circumstances of this case we do not think that a further enquiry should be directed.

    3. We direct that the whole proceeding against the petitioner should be quashed.

    4. Proceedings quashed.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Ganeswar Paharaj Accused v. King-Emperor Opposite Party.
    (Jan 21, 1921)