Nanhua vs Emperor - 1937 Supreme(All) 190

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1937 Supreme(All) 190

BENNET
Nanhua – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent

ORDER

Bennet, J. - This is a criminal reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Fatehpur recommending that a conviction of one Nanhua u/s 186, I.P.C., and fine of Rs. 20 or in default 20 days rigorous imprisonment should be set aside on the ground that the facts proved do not disclose the offence. The Judge sets out that a constable was on traffic duty at crossing and Ashiq, brother of the accused, passed on an akka and the constable tried to stop Mm but Ashiq did not obey the order. Shortly afterwards the accused appeared and abused the constable in threatening language for having attempted to stop his brother. The constable made a report and on those facts the accused has been convicted u/s 186, I.P.C. That section states that whoever voluntarily obstructs any public servant in the discharge of his public functions shall be guilty of the offence. Now, the public functions of the constable at the time wars the regulation of traffic at a crossing on a public road. The action of the accused prevented the constable from giving his attention to the traffic The Judge states:

Now the word "obstruction" as used in Section 186 means physical obstruction, i.e. actual resistance or obstacle

Click Here to Read the rest of this document