Skip to content


Queen-empress Vs. Kuniyil Ram and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1901)ILR24Mad337
AppellantQueen-empress
RespondentKuniyil Ram and anr.
Cases Referred and Komal Chandra Pal v. Gour Chand Audhikari I.L.R.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code - act v of 1898, section 203--dismissal of complaint-- refusal by magistrate to take cognizance of case--subsequent trial by him. - - 3. these cases are clearly distinguishable from the present case......refers to the procedure of a magistrate who has taken cognizance of a case, section 196 of the code of criminal procedure debars a magistrate from taking cognizance of certain offences unless sanction has been obtained. in form, no doubt, the magistrate before whom, in the present case, the complaint was preferred, purported to dismiss the complaint; under section 203 of the code of criminal procedure. in substance what he did was to refuse to take cognizance of the offence on the ground that sanction to prosecute was necessary and sanction had not been obtained.2. in the calcutta cases and in the allahabad case to which our attention has been called queen-empress v. adam khan i.l.r. 22 all. 106, nilratan sen v. jogesh chundra bhattacharjee i.l.r. 23 calc. 983 and komal chandra pal.....
Judgment:

1. Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure refers to the procedure of a Magistrate who has taken cognizance of a case, Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure debars a Magistrate from taking cognizance of certain offences unless sanction has been obtained. In form, no doubt, the Magistrate before whom, in the present case, the complaint was preferred, purported to dismiss the complaint; under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In substance what he did was to refuse to take cognizance of the offence on the ground that sanction to prosecute was necessary and sanction had not been obtained.

2. In the Calcutta cases and in the Allahabad case to which our attention has been called Queen-Empress v. Adam Khan I.L.R. 22 All. 106, Nilratan Sen v. Jogesh Chundra Bhattacharjee I.L.R. 23 Calc. 983 and Komal Chandra Pal v. Gour Chand Audhikari I.L.R. 24 Calc. 286 the Magistrate before whom the first complaint was preferred took cognizance of the alleged offence and after adjudicating upon the case, made an order under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3. These cases are clearly distinguishable from the present case.

4. We must set aside the acquittal and direct the Magistrate to deal with the appeal according to law.


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