[1937] EACA 203

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [1937] EACA 203
Parties: Applicant: Gordhan Gopal; Respondent: Chhagan Raja
Court: East African Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Uganda
Judgment Date: 1 January 1937
Case Number: Cr. Rev. Case No. 851/1935
Procedural Posture: Criminal Revision / Application for Review of Revision Order
Outcome: application dismissed
Judges: Sheridan CJ, Webb, J
Legal Topics: Criminal Revision, Review Jurisdiction, Powers of Supreme Court
Source Language: english

Criminal Law Criminal Revision Review Jurisdiction Powers of Supreme Court

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Gordhan Gopal

Applicant

Chhagan Raja

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Application for Review of Revision Order

Legal Issues

1 Does the Supreme Court have power to review an order made by one of its judges on revision in a criminal case.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review an order made by one of its judges on revision in a criminal case. This conclusion is supported by authoritative precedents, specifically Queen-Empress v. Fox and Queen-Empress v. Durga Charan, which establish that neither a Divisional Bench nor a single judge has the power to review such orders under the Criminal Procedure Code. The absence of material differences between the current and previous versions of the Code reinforces the applicability of these precedents. Arguments regarding the alleged illegality of the judgment do not affect the jurisdictional limitation. Accordingly, the application for review is dismissed for want of...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

The application for review is dismissed.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.