Skip to content


In Re: Arakkal Ahmad Ali Rajah Avergal of Cannanore - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in4Ind.Cas.97a
AppellantIn Re: Arakkal Ahmad Ali Rajah Avergal of Cannanore
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898),s. 195 - penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 183,186--resisting public servant--withdrawal of attachment--court directing court officer to re-deliver properties to defendant--properties taken possession of by defendant--civil procedure code, (act v of 1908), order 21, rule 55. - 1. the order of the district court of 1st february, 1909, so far as it directed that the properties should be entrusted to the petitioner before it, was not an order authorised by any provision of the civil procedure code. all that is said in order 21, rule 55, is that when a certain event has happened, the attachment should be deemed to have been withdrawn. if follows, therefore, that there was no resistance to the taking of property by the lawful authority of a public servant and no voluntary obstruction to a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, and, therefore, no offence under section 183 or 186, indian penal code. the sanction is set aside.
Judgment:

1. The order of the District Court of 1st February, 1909, so far as it directed that the properties should be entrusted to the petitioner before it, was not an order authorised by any provision of the Civil Procedure Code. All that is said in Order 21, Rule 55, is that when a certain event has happened, the attachment should be deemed to have been withdrawn. If follows, therefore, that there was no resistance to the taking of property by the lawful authority of a public servant and no voluntary obstruction to a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, and, therefore, no offence under Section 183 or 186, Indian Penal Code. The sanction is set aside.


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