Skip to content


The Public Prosecutor Vs. Thavaslandi thevan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in4Ind.Cas.1039
AppellantThe Public Prosecutor
RespondentThavaslandi thevan
Cases ReferredQueen v. Periannan
Excerpt:
penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 182(a), 211 - offence not proved under section 211 but facts establishing offence under section 182--duty of magistrate to convict under section 182. - - but if the magistrate believed as he apparently did believe, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the magistrate should have framed a charge of an offence punishable under section 182(a) of the indian penal code, as the facts clearly amount to an offence under that section, read it must be in connection with the obligation imposed on the village magistrate by section 45(c), criminal procedure code.order1. we are disposed to agree with the head assistant magistrate that the facts alleged do not amount to an offence tinder section 211, indian penal code; but if the magistrate believed as he apparently did believe, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the magistrate should have framed a charge of an offence punishable under section 182(a) of the indian penal code, as the facts clearly amount to an offence under that section, read it must be in connection with the obligation imposed on the village magistrate by section 45(c), criminal procedure code.2. the case of the queen v. periannan 4 m. 241 is not an authority against this view, since in that case the learned judges only held that no offence punishable under section 182(6) was committed. we set aside the order of the.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. We are disposed to agree with the Head Assistant Magistrate that the facts alleged do not amount to an offence tinder Section 211, Indian Penal Code; but if the Magistrate believed as he apparently did believe, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the Magistrate should have framed a charge of an offence punishable under Section 182(a) of the Indian Penal Code, as the facts clearly amount to an offence under that section, read it must be in connection with the obligation imposed on the Village Magistrate by Section 45(c), Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The case of the Queen v. Periannan 4 M. 241 is not an authority against this view, since in that case the learned Judges only held that no offence punishable under Section 182(6) was committed. We set aside the order of the Magistrate and direct him to make further inquiry into the alleged offence under Section 182(a) of the Indian Penal Code.


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