High CourtsDivision Bench

Ram Sunder De vs Rajab Ali and Another

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 16 February 1886 · Citation: (1885) ILR (Cal) 558

HON’BLE JUDGES
McDonell, J · Beverley, 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 · 143 words

McDonell and Beverley, JJ.—Without going into the question whether or not any criminal offence has been committed, we think that the order of the Bench acquitting the accused must be set aside on the ground that no member of that Bench was a member of the Bench which heard the evidence for the prosecution in the case. The trial was a summary one in which the evidence is not recorded at any length, and it was, therefore, the more necessary that the case should have been disposed of by one or more Magistrates before whom the witnesses had been examined. We accordingly set aside the order of dismissal, and direct that the matter be tried de novo, or, if possible, disposed of by a Bench of whom one or more of the Magistrates who heard the evidence for the prosecutions shall be members.