CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sen, J.
The King - Appellant
Versus
Darbarilal Show - Respondent
Decided On : 21-06-1949
Reference - Conviction under Section 188, Penal Code - 144, Criminal P.C. - Summary
Fact of the Case:
A person was convicted for disobeying an order under Section 144, Criminal P.C. The Sessions Judge recommended setting aside the conviction citing lack of jurisdiction and irregular service of the order.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Magistrate had jurisdiction to pass the order under Section 144, Criminal P.C. and that the irregularity in service did not invalidate the proceedings. The Court also held that the disobedience did not meet the criteria for punishment under Section 188, Penal Code.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the Magistrate, Irregularity in service of the order, Criteria for punishment under Section 188, Penal Code
Ratio Decidendi: The Magistrate had jurisdiction to pass the order under Section 144, Criminal P.C. Irregularity in service did not invalidate the proceedings. Disobedience did not meet the criteria for punishment under Section 188, Penal Code.
Final Decision: The Court set aside the conviction and directed refund of the fine, if paid, and release of the accused if in custody.
ORDER
Sen, J. - This is a Reference by the Sessions Judge of Burdwan, recommending that the order of conviction and aentenca passed on one Darbarilal Shaw for having committed an offence punishable u/s 188, Penal Code, be set aside on the grounds stated in the Letter of Reference, The facts briefly are as follows :
2. On 12th January 1948, a report was sub-mitted by the Khasmahal Tahsildar that Darbari. lal Bhaw was making additions and alterations in an old building in such a way as to encroach upon the Khasmahal lands on the Grand Trunk Road to the extent of 6 inches in breadth. Upon this report being made to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, he sent it for disposal to another Magistrate Sri. J. K. Ghose who drew up proceedings according to the provisions of Section 144, Criminal P.C. On 9th February 1948, another report was submitted by the Khasmahal Tahaildar that the order u/s 144, Criminal P.C. was being disobeyed. Upon this a complaint was made by the Magistrate Sri J. K. Ghose charging Darbarilal Shaw and another with having committed an offence punishable u/s 188, Penal Code. The matter was heard by Sri 8. C. Banerjee, Magistrate, 1st class, Asansol. He acquitted the other accused but found Dar. barilal Shaw guilty of the offence and fined him Bs, 100; in default he was sentenced to simple imprisonment for 7 days.
3. The learned Judge in referring this matter to this Court states that the conviction is bad, inasmuch as Sri J, K. Ghose who passed the order u/s 144, Criminal P.C., was not specially empowered to pass such an order and therefore he acted without jurisdiction. The order being without jurisdiction, the conviction for disobedience of the order, according to the learned Judge, cannot stand. The second ground mentioned in the letter of the learned Judge is that the service of the order passed u/s 144, Criminal P.C. wag not regular, inasmuch as a duplicate copy of the order was not left with the accused. Lastly, he says that the order u/s 144, Criminal P.C. should not have been passed as the evidence given was not sufficient to warrant such an order.
4. In my opinion, none of these three grounds would justify this Court in setting aside the conviction of the accused.
5. As regards the first ground, I find that it was never taken in the petition before the learned Judge, 12 or 13 grounds were taken and the learned Judge sent those grounds to the learned Magistrate for his explanation. The learned Magistrate gave a full explanation with respect to all the grounds which were taken. Ha was not asked, however, to state whether the Magistrate had the power to pass the order u/s 144, Criminal P.C. and very naturally he did not state anything with regard to this matter. The learned Judge should not have come to the conclusion that the Magistrate had no such power without first asking the Magistrate to explain. To make a reference on a ground which the Magistrate had not had the opportunity to meet is scarcely fair on the Magistrate. There is nothing to show that the Magistrate acted without jurisdiction. A Magistrate of the first class may be invested with powers to pass orders u/s 144, Criminal P.C. There is nothing to show that this Magistrate was not empowered to do this. Again a Magistrate, acting as a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, has, by virtue of hi3 position as Sub-Divisional Magistrate, power to entertain proceedings u/s 144, Criminal P.C. From the papers sent to this Court, it seems that the Magistrate Sri J. C. Ghoae was acting as Sub-Divisional Magistrate when he made this order. In the judgment passed by the learned Magistrate trying the case under 3.188, Penal Code, there is a clear statement that Sri J. K. Ghose was working on the file of the Sub. Divisional Magistrate when he drew up proceedings u/s 144, Criminal P.C. In the question put by the learned Magistrate to the acoused when he was examined u/s 342, Criminal P.C. it was stated that Sri J. K. Ghose had issued the order u/s 144, Criminal P.C. as the Sub-Divi
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.