Report No. 32
Important Cases under Section 9, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Q.E. v. Mangal Takchand, (1885) ILR 10 Bom 258 (263, 273, 282, 283)
[(Need for formal appointment under section 9(1)-Resident of Aden not a Judge of the Court of Session in the absence of an appointment as a Sessions Judge.]
Lakshman v. Emp., ILR 55 Bom 576: AIR 1931 Bom 313 (319, 321) (SB)
[Section 9(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898-State Government's order under-Whether High Court can transfer the case under section 526].
Supdt. and Legal Remembrancer v. Iijabullah, ILR 58 Cal 117: AIR 1931 Cal 190 (191).
["there is only one Court of Session in each Sessions Division, sitting at different places and manned by a number of Judges"].
Shaik Silar (in re:), AIR 1941 Mad 681 (Lakshman Rao J.)
(Predecessors of a Subordinate Judge were appointed Assistant Sessions Judge, Kistna, by name. Their successor Subordinate Judge was not appointed as Assistant Sessions Judge, by name or designation. Trial by him of a Sessions case held illegal).
Petan Ali Khan (in re:), ILR 1947 Mad 365: AIR 1947 Mad 248 (255).
(Successor Sessions Judge cannot pronounce judgment written by predecessor).
Palaniswany (in re:),ILR 1957 Mad 597: AIR 1957 Mad 351 (352),
paragraphs 2 and 3 (DB).
(District Magistrates appointed ex-officio Assistant Sessions Judges-held, appointment is valid).
Kamleshwar v. Dharam Deo, ILR 36 Pat 995: AIR 1957 Pat 375 (377, 378),
paragraphs 7, 8, 16 and 18.
Nawab Khambakhan v. Emp., AIR 1943 Sind 39 (45) (FB).
[Section 9 does not require a formal publication. The notification does not confer the power. Section 9 confers the necessary powers. Government notification merely declares or records the acts of Government.]