Skip to content


Marudayya Pillai and ors. Vs. Ravutha Perumal Pillai - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1892)2MLJ286
AppellantMarudayya Pillai and ors.
RespondentRavutha Perumal Pillai
Cases Referred(Atchayya v. Gangayya I. L.
Excerpt:
- - order 1. the objection to the jurisdiction of the 2nd class magistrate is clearly untenable......provides that no court shall take cognizance of any offence described in section 463, indian penal code (forgery) ' when such offence has been committed by a party to any proceeding in any court in respect of a document given in evidence in such proceeding except with the previous sanction or on the complaint of such court.' it has been held (atchayya v. gangayya i. l. r 15 m 138) that a registrar, acting under sections 72-75 of the registration act is a court within the meaning of this section but it has never been hold, and there seems no reason for so holding, that a registrar in exercising his ordinary functions of registering a document the execution of which is not denied is a court within the meaning of the section.3. we hold that the sanction of the registrar was not necessary to.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. The objection to the jurisdiction of the 2nd Class Magistrate is clearly untenable. The charge is one of forgery and it is argued that because the document in respect of which the forgery is alleged was registered, therefore the sanction of the registrar before whom it was registered is necessary for the prosecution under Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Clause (c) of that section provides that no court shall take cognizance of any offence described in Section 463, Indian Penal Code (forgery) ' when such offence has been committed by a party to any proceeding in any court in respect of a document given in evidence in such proceeding except with the previous sanction or on the complaint of such court.' It has been held (Atchayya v. Gangayya I. L. R 15 M 138) that a registrar, acting under Sections 72-75 of the Registration Act is a court within the meaning of this section but it has never been hold, and there seems no reason for so holding, that a registrar in exercising his ordinary functions of registering a document the execution of which is not denied is a court within the meaning of the section.

3. We hold that the sanction of the registrar was not necessary to the prosecution in this case and dismiss this petition.


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