Skip to content


The Queen-empress Vs. Palani and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1883)ILR7Mad537
AppellantThe Queen-empress
RespondentPalani and ors.
Excerpt:
indian stamp act, sections 37, 40 - offence against stamp law--sanction to prosecute--intention to defraud. - charles a. turner, kt., c.j.1. in our judgment the law does not require intention to be proved as part of the offence, but, in order to prevent indiscriminate prosecutions, it confines the power of instituting prosecutions to the collector, and instructs him to exercise it only when it appears to him the offence had been committed with an intention to evade payment of the proper duty.2. he is not required to make a formal inquiry or to record a proceeding when he gives a sanction in writing for a prosecution. it is to be presumed he has governed his decision by the rule prescribed. the order of the appellate court in the case of the maker of the note must be reversed, and a rehearing of the appeal ordered. the acquittal of the first accused is affirmed.
Judgment:

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.

1. In our judgment the law does not require intention to be proved as part of the offence, but, in order to prevent indiscriminate prosecutions, it confines the power of instituting prosecutions to the Collector, and instructs him to exercise it only when it appears to him the offence had been committed with an intention to evade payment of the proper duty.

2. He is not required to make a formal inquiry or to record a proceeding when he gives a sanction in writing for a prosecution. It is to be presumed he has governed his decision by the rule prescribed. The order of the Appellate Court in the case of the maker of the note must be reversed, and a rehearing of the appeal ordered. The acquittal of the first accused is affirmed.


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