Skip to content


Search Results Judgments > Act:JUDICIAL OFFICERS' PROTECTION ACT Page:2

Apr 23 1975

The Advocate General (A.P.) Vs. Rachapudi Subba Rao

  • Decided on : 23-Apr-1975

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1976CriLJ746

... suits by tlhe judicial officer is clearly protected by the provisions of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act. Section 1 of that Act clearly lays down that no Judge, Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any civil court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of his judicial duty, ... damages by the respondent is maintainable against a (judicial officer. Since & notice claiming damages should precede the institution of such a suit, the respondent issued this notice. Filing of such a suit is not excluded by the provisions of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act. So, a suit for recovery of dlamages against a judicial officer would be maintainable when it is filed1 and ... he had jurisdiction to do the act complained of. Even if the act done by him is not within his jurisdiction, even then, he is protected if he, in good faith, believed that he had jurisdiction to do the act. We draw full support to this understanding of Section 1 of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act from the observations of the Supreme ... Rood faith in levelling the serious charges against a judicial officer. But then what is important is that even the respondent does not dispute that the learned Subordinate Judge had jurisdiction to entertain the suits and render judgments. Once that much is conceded, the protection afforded by the Judicial Officers' Protection Act is fully available to the learned Subordinate Judge and ...

Mar 13 1979

Muddada Chayanna Vs. G. Veerabhadrarao and Ors.

  • Decided on : 13-Mar-1979

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1979AP253

... on the word used namely 'judicially- in S 1-A of Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850 and contended that the judicial officer is protected only when he acts judicially and not merely because he acts in a judicial capacity. He also placed stress an 'good faith. and if it can be Shown that the judicial officer has not acted in good faith, he is not entitled to protection under the Act. In defence of this ... of a receiver was made acted only in the discharge of his judicial duties and it was within his jurisdiction to deal with the matter in question and he was the judicial officer empowered to do so, and therefore, the plaint is liable to be rejected on the ground that he is protected under cl. 1-A of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850 as amended by ... of the Judicial officers Protection Act. 1850 as amended by a State Amendment by the State of Andhra Pradesh (Vide A.P. Act XXIII of 1958, Sec. 3 and Schedule (1-2-1960) ). The said section reads as follows:--'No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court for any act done ... respondent has got jurisdiction to deal with the matter. Even thought a person who does not have the jurisdiction, acts in good faith thinking that he had got jurisdiction, he would be entitled to protection under Section 1-A of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act. But we need not go to that extent in the present case as the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent ...

Aug 12 1985

Court on its own Motion Vs. Shamsher Singh Bedi and Ors.

  • Decided on : 12-Aug-1985

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1986CriLJ293

... protection under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act is not an absolute protection but it is only a qualified protection and where a Magistrate acts illegally, mala fide and without jurisdiction in the matter of arrest he would be liable in tort to pay damages.Section 1 of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850 is as; -No Judge. Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially ... judicial Officer. The right to file a suit, if not restrained by the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850, does not give the party a right to malign an officer, who passed the orders, by urging that it is only the malicious act of such an officer, which can be the basis of the suit. On this pretext libellous language cannot be used to malign the officer ... protection but it is only a qualified protection and where a Magistrate acts illegally, mala fide and without jurisdiction in the matter of arrest he would be liable in tort to pay damages.Section 1 of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850 is as; -No Judge. Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court for any act ... to pay damages.Section 1 of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850 is as; -No Judge. Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of his judicial duty, whether or not within the ...

Aug 18 2001

Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another Vs. S ...

  • Decided on : 18-Aug-2001

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(5)ALD460; 2001(2)ALD(Cri)617; 2001(5)ALT255

... us. As a Judicial Officer the appellant has no protection, because he is not shownto have acted in ordering that the respondent be arrested in the discharge of the duties of his office as a Magistrate.24. This decision is therefore an authority to show that when an Officer does not act as a Judicial Officer, the protection under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act is not ... enacted the Judicial Officers' Protection Act for the greater protection of Magistrates and others acting judicially. Section 1 of the Act provides:No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any civil Court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of his judicial duty, whether ... duties of his office as a Magistrate.24. This decision is therefore an authority to show that when an Officer does not act as a Judicial Officer, the protection under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act is not available.25. In K. Subba Rao (supra), the Apex Court held that notice imputing malice partiality and dishonesty to the Court in the judicial adjudication of ... the provisions of Section 121 of the Evidence Act must be interpreted in the light of Article 235 of the Constitution of India. According to the learned Counsel, the investigation of a Judicial Officer in such matters is not only protected under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, but alsounder the Contempt of Courts Act.11. In support of his aforementioned contention, ...

Apr 10 2013

S.Velankanni Vs. Chitradevi

  • Decided on : 10-Apr-2013

Court : Chennai

... acts were protected under the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850, is also not tenable. Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850 reads as under: "1.Non-Liability To Suit Of Officers Acting Judicially, For Official Acts Done In Good Faith And Of Officers Executing Warrants And Orders.- No Judge, Magistrate, Justice Of The Peace, Collector Or Other Person Acting Judicially Shall Be Liable To Be Sued In Any Civil Court For Any Act ... act of Respondent No.2 was not bonafide in nature.30. The contention of Respondent No.2 that her acts were protected under the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850, is also not tenable. Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850 reads as under: "1.Non-Liability To Suit Of Officers Acting Judicially, For Official Acts Done In Good Faith And Of Officers ... Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850 reads as under: "1.Non-Liability To Suit Of Officers Acting Judicially, For Official Acts Done In Good Faith And Of Officers Executing Warrants And Orders.- No Judge, Magistrate, Justice Of The Peace, Collector Or Other Person Acting Judicially Shall Be Liable To Be Sued In Any Civil Court For Any Act Done Or Ordered To Be Done By Him In The Discharge Of His Judicial ... has acted in a judicial and judicious manner and has discharged her duties in good faith and her judicial acts were duly protected under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850. It is also the stand of the second respondent that there are no allegations that she acted ...

Dec 07 1971

In the Matter of Contempt of Court Proceedings Vs. K.S. Sethi

  • Decided on : 07-Dec-1971

Court : Delhi

Reported in : ILR1972Delhi113

... Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1950 which offers protection to a judicial officer acting judicially in two classes of cases: (a) in respect of acts done or ordered to be done within the limits of his jurisdiction, and (b) for acts done or ordered to be done outside the limits of his jurisdiction. In the former class of cases the protection offered by the Act is absolute and the officer ... Judicial Officers Protection Act, whereby judicial officers are provided benefit against such notices if the orders are passed by them innocently and in good faith, and accused Shri R. L. Gupta and B. C. Misra, J. of having 'acted with their ugliest had faith abusing the seats of justice defying their oath of office ... judicial officers concerned on account of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, the notice could not be looked upon as a preliminary step towards a suit but must be treated as a gratuitous attempt to interfere with the course of justice. (14) In the present case the learned Judges were equally acting within the limits of their jurisdiction and the question of the contemner challenging their acts ...

Jul 28 2006

N.V. Shamsunder, Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Vs. Savitabai Wd/o Sambhirmal S ...

  • Decided on : 28-Jul-2006

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(6)ALLMR139; 2006(5)MhLj639

... Acts, it would be appropriate to quote Section 1 of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act of 1850 and Section 3 of the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985. Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act of 1850 reads as under:1. Non-liability to suit of officers acting judicially, for official acts done in good faith and of officers executing warrants and order:- No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially ... Judicial Officers' Protection Act of 1850 and Section 3 of the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985. Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act of 1850 reads as under:1. Non-liability to suit of officers acting judicially, for official acts done in good faith and of officers executing warrants and order:- No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court for any act ... Judicial Officers Protection Act of 1850 reads as under:1. Non-liability to suit of officers acting judicially, for official acts done in good faith and of officers executing warrants and order:- No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of his judicial ... barred under the Judicial Officers Protection Act of 1850 (hereinafter referred to as The 1850 Act) and the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as The 1985 Act). The plaintiffs by ...

Sep 27 2002

C.A. Jagannathan Vs. T.E. Srinivasan,

  • Decided on : 27-Sep-2002

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2001)3MLJ691

... 2) is to the effect that the provisions of Indian Evidence Act and Indian Oaths Act shall apply to such inquiries. Sub-Section (3) lays down that the Officer holding inquiry shall be deemed to be a person acting judiciously within the meaning of Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850. From the above provisions of the Act, it is very clear that if a Deputy Commissioner wants to ... for which the 'Civil Procedure Code, The Indian Evidence Act and The Indian Oaths Act' would apply and the Deputy Commissioner shall be deemed to be a person acting judicially within the meaning of Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850. All these would show that the enquiry contemplated under Section 63 shall be a quasi-judicial proceeding. But the enquiry that was conducted by the Deputy ... lays down that the Officer holding inquiry shall be deemed to be a person acting judiciously within the meaning of Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850. From the above provisions of the Act, it is very clear that if a Deputy Commissioner wants to hold an inquiry under Section 63(e), the same must be in conformity with Section 110 of the Act which lays down the ... person acting judiciously within the meaning of Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850. From the above provisions of the Act, it is very clear that if a Deputy Commissioner wants to hold an inquiry under Section 63(e), the same must be in conformity with Section 110 of the Act which lays down the procedure and powers of Inquiries.23. Section 110(1) of the Act ...

Jan 06 1989

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Ranganathaswami Devasthanam Vs. His Ho ...

  • Decided on : 06-Jan-1989

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1989)2MLJ54

... acting judicially within the meaning of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850', it could be seen that to cover the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner also with protection given under the Judicial Officers Protection Act they must be deemed to be a person acting judicially. Thus it is for the limited purpose they are deemed to be persons acting judicially ... acting judicially within the meaning of the Judicial Officers Protection Act and therefore passing an order by the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner is a judicial act and not an official act within the meaning of Section 80, C.P.C. We find there is no merit in this submission. From the words 'the Commissioner or a Deputy Commissioner ... acting judicially within the meaning of the Judicial Officers Protection Act ... judicial act and not an official act within the meaning of Section 80, C.P.C. We find there is no merit in this submission. From the words 'the Commissioner or a Deputy Commissioner ... acting judicially within the meaning of the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850', it could be seen that to cover the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner also with protection given under the Judicial Officers Protection Act ...

Aug 17 1937

Sewalram Agarwalla and Anr. Vs. Abdul Majid and Ors.

  • Decided on : 17-Aug-1937

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1938Cal177

... protected under the Judicial Officers' Protection Act (Act 18 of 1850). The Preamble of this Act shows that this Act was passed for the greater protection of the Magistrates and others acting judicially. The Act contains only one section and it is in these terms:No Judge, Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any Civil Court, for any act ... the appellants is that he is not protected by the Judicial Officers' Protection Act as he was not bound to carry out the order of defendant 1 to search and seize the goods until and unless a search warrant was issued by defendant 1 in the prescribed form. The concluding portion of S.1,. Judicial Officers' Protection Act (Act 18 of 1850) however says that a ... provided that such warrant or order was issued by a judicial officer in a matter within his jurisdiction, and not merely in a matter in which such judicial officer had authority or power to issue the particular warrant.7. Under the circumstances I am of opinion that defendant 2 is also protected by the Judicial Officers' Protection Act. The further difficulty in the way of the ... the plaintiffs on 25th September 1934. On these facts, the Courts below have dismissed the suit against defendants 1 and 2. They have held that they are protected by the Judicial Officers' Protection Act (Act 18 of 1850) for the following reasons:(1) That defendant 1 made the order for search and seizure under Section 96, Criminal P. C, in the bona ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //