Skip to content


In Re: S.P. Rangasami Goundar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Reported in(1964)1MLJ98
AppellantIn Re: S.P. Rangasami Goundar and anr.
Excerpt:
- - that section clearly states that action could be taken in the manner done by the learned special first class magistrate only on an adjourned date if the complainant did not appear. this case with which we are concerned was not adjourned to 16th february, 1962 but to 23rd february, 1962. the order directing acquittal of the accused under section 247 criminal procedure code is, therefore clearly irregular......need only detail the facts of the case to show that the order passed by the learned-special first class magistrate, shevapet, salem, is untenable.2. the executive authority of the salem municipality laid a complaint against the two accused, rangasami gounder and s. komarasami chetty, for offences punishable under sections 218 and 313 of the madras district municipalities act for not having complied with a direction of the municipalities to demolish a terraced building which was in a dangerous condition. this case was filed before the speical first class magistrate, shevapet, salem, as s.t.r. no. 290 of 1962 and the same was posted for appearance of the accused to 9th february, 1962. on this date a representative of one of the accused appeared before the court with an. authorisation.....
Judgment:
ORDER

P. Kunhamad Kutti, J.

1. This case arises out of a reference made by the district Magistrate (Judicial) Salem and notice of this reference was directed to be given to both the Public Prosecutor and the accused. The accused does not appear. I need only detail the facts of the case to show that the order passed by the learned-Special First Class Magistrate, Shevapet, Salem, is untenable.

2. The Executive Authority of the Salem Municipality laid a complaint against the two accused, Rangasami Gounder and S. Komarasami Chetty, for offences punishable under Sections 218 and 313 of the Madras District Municipalities Act for not having complied with a direction of the Municipalities to demolish a terraced building which was in a dangerous condition. This case was filed before the Speical First Class Magistrate, Shevapet, Salem, as S.T.R. No. 290 of 1962 and the same was posted for appearance of the accused to 9th February, 1962. On this date a representative of one of the accused appeared before the Court with an. authorisation letter, not signed by the Accused. The case was, therefore, adjourned to 13th February, 1963, on which date also the accused did not appear, but one Subramania Pandaram produced an authorisation which the Special First Class Magistrate was not inclined to accept. He, therefore, directed summons to be issued to the accused and adjourned the case to 23rd February, 1962. Meanwhile on 16th February, 1962 the case appears to have been taken up by the Magistrate and, finding the complainant absent he acquitted the two accused under Section 247, Criminal Procedure Code. That section clearly states that action could be taken in the manner done by the learned Special First Class Magistrate only on an adjourned date if the complainant did not appear. This case with which we are concerned was not adjourned to 16th February, 1962 but to 23rd February, 1962. The order directing acquittal of the accused under Section 247 Criminal Procedure Code is, therefore clearly irregular. The same has to be and is hereby set aside.

3. This case will be sent back to the District Magistrate (Judicial) Salem, for being tried afresh by a competent Magistrate.


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