Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Ramchandra Bapuji Deshmukh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Reference No. 59 of 1921
Judge
Reported inAIR1923Bom22; (1922)24BOMLR382; 66Ind.Cas.997
AppellantEmperor
RespondentRamchandra Bapuji Deshmukh
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 545-fine-compensation out of fine-compensation for injury caused by the offence.;the accused obtained ornaments by cheating the complainant and pledged a portion of the ornaments with a stranger. he was convicted for the offence and ordered to pay a fine. out of the fine, a certain amount was ordered to be paid to the pledgee of the ornaments :-;that the order to pay a certain amount out of the fine as compensation to the pledgee was outside the scope of section 545 of the civil procedure code 1898. - maharashtra scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de-notified tribes (vimukta jatis), nomadic tribes, other backward classes and special backward category (regulation of issuance and verification of) caste certificate act (23 of 2001), sections..........were pledged with a person called dalichand. the magistrate directed that out of the fine, if recovered, rs. 35 should be paid as compensation to dalichand under section 545, criminal procedure code. but that section only enables the magistrate to direct that the whole or any part of the fine, if recovered, should be applied in compensation for the injury caused by the offence committed. the offence committed was cheating, and no injury was caused to dalichand by the cheating. we think, therefore, that the district magistrate was right in asking this court to revise the order passed by the trying magistrate under section 545, criminal procedure code, and the order must be set aside, and if any compensation has been paid to dalichand, it must be refunded.
Judgment:

Norman Macleod, C.J.

1. The accused was convicted of an offence punishable under Section 420, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced by the Magistrate to four months' rigorous imprisonment and a time of Rs. 100. The accused had dishonestly induced the complainant to part with her ornaments, and these were pledged with a person called Dalichand. The Magistrate directed that out of the fine, if recovered, Rs. 35 should be paid as compensation to Dalichand under Section 545, Criminal Procedure Code. But that section only enables the Magistrate to direct that the whole or any part of the fine, if recovered, should be applied in compensation for the injury caused by the offence committed. The offence committed was cheating, and no injury was caused to Dalichand by the cheating. We think, therefore, that the District Magistrate was right in asking this Court to revise the order passed by the trying Magistrate under Section 545, Criminal Procedure Code, and the order must be set aside, and if any Compensation has been paid to Dalichand, it must be refunded.


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