Skip to content


The Public Prosecutor Vs. Kanholi Kunhiraman Nayar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1941Mad392; (1941)1MLJ44
AppellantThe Public Prosecutor
RespondentKanholi Kunhiraman Nayar
Excerpt:
- .....the respondent a postman was charged by the police with an offence under section 52 of the indian post office act for secreting two postal articles in course of transmission by post and he was committed for trial by the court of session of that offence. there was no complaint by order of or authority from the director-general or postmaster-general, and a preliminary objection was taken to the trial on the ground that the acts also constitute the minor offence under section 53 of the indian post office act of detaining the postal articles, which according to section 72 of the indian post office act cannot be taken cognizance of unless upon complaint made by order of or authority from the director-general or postmaster-general. the objection was upheld and the respondent was acquitted.2......
Judgment:

Lakshmana Rao, J.

1. The respondent a postman was charged by the police with an offence under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act for secreting two postal articles in course of transmission by post and he was committed for trial by the Court of Session of that offence. There was no complaint by order of or authority from the Director-General or Postmaster-General, and a preliminary objection was taken to the trial on the ground that the acts also constitute the minor offence under Section 53 of the Indian Post Office Act of detaining the postal articles, which according to Section 72 of the Indian Post Office Act cannot be taken cognizance of unless upon complaint made by order of or authority from the Director-General or Postmaster-General. The objection was upheld and the respondent was acquitted.

2. Hence this appeal by the Provincial Government that the order of acquittal cannot be supported. The offence under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act can be taken cognizance of without any complaint, and the commitment was legal. That the acts also constitute the minor offence under Section 53 of the Indian Post Office Act is no bar to the trial of the offence under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act and the respondent ought to have been tried for that offence. The order of acquittal is therefore set aside and the respondent will be tried in accordance with law.


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