High CourtsSingle Bench

Maturwa vs Emperor

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 20 March 1918 · Citation: AIR 1918 All 390 : 46 Ind. Cas. 156

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.C. Banerji, 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

1 paragraphs · 142 words
1.

The accused in this case was convicted under the Gambling Act. The Magistrate who convicted him ordered confiscation of the money which was found in his possession. The learned Sessions Judge has reported the case to this Court, with the recommendation that this portion of the learned Magistrate''s order should be set aside as not being in conformity with law. It is clear from the language of Section 13 of the Gambling Act that all that could be confiscated, were the instruments of gaming. This was so held in the case to which the learned Sessions Judge refers. Acceding, therefore, to the recommendations of the learned Sessions Judge, I set aside so much of the order of the Magistrate as directs the confiscation of the money found in the possession of the accused and direct that it be refunded to him.