High CourtsSingle Bench

In Re: K. Sellandi

Madras High Court · Decided on 20 November 1913 · Citation: AIR 1914 Mad 149(2) : (1915) ILR (Mad) 552

HON’BLE JUDGES
Millar, J
Ask AI about this case

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

11 paragraphs · 224 words

Millar, J.—In this case the Magistrate has found the accused Miler, J. guilty, and then committed him to the Court of Sessions u/s 348,

Criminal Procedure Code. The effect of the conviction would seem to be that Section 403, Criminal Procedure Code, would bar the trial by the

Court of Sessions.

2.

It is not entirely easy to deal satisfactorily with cases u/s 348. The Magistrate is bound to commit if there has been a previous conviction of one

of the offences described unless he can adequately punish the accused; consequently he must either as a preliminary matter or at any rate before

framing a charge determine whether there has been a previous conviction; having decided that point, he will have to consider whether in the

circumstances of the case his powers enable him to pass sufficiently severe sentence. If he thinks they do so permit, he may either commit the

accused for trial or try him himself: if they do not so permit, but the evidence does not warrant the discharge of the accused, he must frame a

charge u/s 210 of the Code and commit him for trial under chapter XVIII.

3.

In the present case I set aside the conviction and direct the Magistrate to frame a charge u/s 210 and commit the accused for trial before the

Court of Sessions.