AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 160 wordsKumaraswami Sastri, J.—The Joint Magistrate has not considered the question of possession, or found that the accused had any common
object. There were 20 accused; but the Joint Magistrate has not considered the case of each accused or evidence. The whole case is disposed of
in two short paragraphs. In Jamait Mullick v. Emperor 35 C.P 138 : 12 C.W.N. 134 : 6 Cri. L.J. 427 it was held that when there are several
accused, it must appear on the face of the judgment that the case against each of the accused has been taken into consideration and reasons should
be given, as far as may be necessary, to show that the Appellate Court has devoted judicial attention to the case of each of the accused"". Farkan
v. Somsher Mahomed 22 C.P 241 is also in point.
I set aside the judgment of the Appellate Court and direct that the appeal be re-tried and judgment written according to law.