Jackson, J
[1] It is argued that restraining a horse on which a person is riding is not wrongful as defined by S. 339, I. P. C. If the moment of restraint the person is pervented from proceeding at the moment of restraint the terms ofthe sectoon are satisfied. It is no defence that he might have got off the horse, and walked in the same direction.
[2] The petition is dismissed.
Are you looking for a
legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a
legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and
Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.
In Re Peria Ponnuswami Goundan v.
In Re Peria Ponnuswami Goundan v.
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
No. | 24-10-1926
Advocate List
- For The Appearing Parties ----.
Bench
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JACKSON
Eq Citations
- 100 IND. CAS. 544
- AIR 1927 MAD 506
- LQ/MadHC/1926/458
Head Note
A. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — Offences — Wrongful restraint — Restraining a horse on which a person is riding — Held, if at the moment of restraint the person is prevented from proceeding, the terms of S. 339, IPC are satisfied — It is no defence that he might have got off the horse, and walked in the same direction — I.P.C., S. 339
