Back
1920 Supreme(Mad) 258
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MARAS
S Aiyar, Napier
In Re: Jonnalagadda
Versus
Unknown
Decided On : 19 August, 1920
The complainant's position changes when informed of the possibility of an order against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and he should be allowed to call his witnesses to present evidence before the Magistrate makes a decision on the order for compensation.
Headnote:
Compensation - Code of Criminal Procedure - The court held that the order for compensation made in spite of the complainant's request for the examination of his remaining witnesses is not illegal, but it should only be made in very exceptional cases. The complainant's position changes when the Magistrate informs him of the possibility of an order against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and he is then on his defense, though not actually accused. The Code provides for a record of his objection, and the complainant should be allowed to call his witnesses to present evidence before the Magistrate makes a decision on the order for compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The court considered Sections 250 and 253 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and held that the order for compensation made in this case was set aside.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order for compensation should only be made in very exceptional cases and that the complainant should be allowed to call his witnesses to present evidence before the Magistrate makes a decision on the order for compensation.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the order for compensation made in spite of the complainant's request for the examination of his remaining witnesses and the complainant's position when informed of the possibility of an order against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complainant's position changes when informed of the possibility of an order against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and he should be allowed to call his witnesses to present evidence before the Magistrate makes a decision on the order for compensation.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order for compensation.
1. Reading Sections 250 and 253 of the Code of Criminal Procedure together, we cannot say that the order for compensation made in spite of the complainants request for the examination of his remaining witnesses is illegal. But, in our opinion, it is not one that should be made except in very exceptional cases Directly the Magistrate informs a complainant that he is considering making an order against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the complainants position is changed and he comes within the mischief of the Criminal Procedure Code and is on his defense, though not actually accused. The Code provides for a record of his objection and it seems to us that his position is made by the words of the Code stronger than that of a complainant against whom sanction for prosecution for an offense under Section 182 or 211, Indian Penal Code, is sought, and in such cases this Court has always required that notice and opportunity to meet should be given and the party permitted to adduce evidence, though Section 195 has no such provision. We think that he should be allowed to call his witnesses for, until the Magistrate has heard them, he cannot say whether their evidence will not help him to decide, first, the propriety of such an order and, secondly, the extent of the culpability of the complainant to be expressed in the amount of the compensation. The case of Queen-Empress v. Chiragh Ali A.W.N. (1898) 198 relied on by Mr. Satyanarayana, who appears for the person who received compensation, was a case where the accused was acquitted and such acquittal in a summons case could only be after all the evidence for the prosecution was taken, and in a warrant case after charge framed. We, therefore, set aside the order for compensation.
