SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(P&H) 22

D.FALSHAW, K.R.PASSEY, MEHAR SINGH
Hakim Rai – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Judgment

Passey, J.

1. The Sub-Judge 2nd Class Kapurthala has filed a complaint against Hakim Rai petitioner under Ss. 193 and 471, I. P. C. Against that complaint and incidentally the order whereby it was decided to prosecute him, the petitioner, as permitted by Section 476, Criminal P. C., took an appeal to the District Judge, Kapurthala, who rejected the same on 9-7-1955. Hakim Rai has now come up in revision under Section 439, Criminal P. C., against which a preliminary objection is raised by the Assistant Advocate General that against an order made by the District Judge, whose Court is a Civil Court, a revision can, if at all, lie under Section 115, C. P. C. and not under Section 439, Criminal P. C. His contention is that although the sub-Judge had in deciding the application of the opponent of Hakim Rai that he (Hakim Rai) be prosecuted for perjury and forgery, to resort to the procedure laid down in Section 476, Criminal P. C., he was not for that reason converted into a Criminal Court. According to tbe learned Assistant Advocate General the Sub-Judge continued to be a Civil Court against whose act of filing the complaint an appeal lay to the District Judge and not to a Sessi






























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top