( 1 ) ON 17-1-1958, the three appellants before us were committed to jail by an order of N. K. Sen, J. , to be detained in simple imprisonment for six months for contempt of this Court and also, it would appear, contempt of the Court of a Magistrate of Barrackpore. Along with the appellants a fourth person, a Police Officer, was also arraigned for contempt and punished by the learned Judge with a fine. He has not appealed. The contempt found against the appellants was violation of an order made by the learned Judge himself in a Criminal Revision Case arising out of a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also, though this is doubtful, some further orders of the Magistrate passed in order to give effect to the learned Judge's order. The appellants contended before' the learned Judge that they hud not been guilty of contempt, but having been convicted, they have now appealed.

( 2 ) THE question, first to bo decided is whether the appeal lies. It can be beld to lie only if it can be shown that the order appealed from is appealable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and it can be shown to be appealable under that Clause only if i