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

1896 Supreme(All) 8

BANERJI, BLAIR
Farzand Ali – Appellant
Versus
Hanuman Prasad – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Blair and Banerji, JJ. - This is a petition in revision presented on behalf of an accused person against whom proceedings have gone to the stage, first, of issuing summons, and secondly, of an order that failing the service of summons a warrant shall issue. One of the grounds of the petition having been abandoned, the only one which remains is that the complaint, which we take to be an information given with intent to set the Court in motion, was made by some person other than the person aggrieved.

2. A preliminary objection was made by Mr. Dillon, who appears for the opposite party that the petition and its grounds disclosed no matter for the exercise of our revisional jurisdiction. He contended that the general principles of law having force in India, which are expressed in Section 191 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1882, empowered any one of the public to complain to a Magistrate of any act which is in violation of the criminal law of this country, while the cases in which the proceedings could only be initiated by the aggrieved person are set forth in Sections 195, 196, 197, 198 and 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He argued that the special limitation imposed

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