Skip to content


Queen-empress Vs. Manick Chandra Sarkar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1897)ILR24Cal492
AppellantQueen-empress
RespondentManick Chandra Sarkar
Excerpt:
practice - sanction to prosecute--application for sanction--criminal procedure code (act x of 1882), sections 337, 339--penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 302--withdrawal of conditional pardon. - ghose and gordon, jj.1. we are of opinion that an application for sanction to prosecute an approver for giving false evidence should be made by motion on behalf of the grown in open court, and not by a letter of reference, such as has been submitted by the sessions judge in the present case.2. as to the other recommendation made by the sessions judge, we think that it is for the authority, which granted the conditional pardon, to withdraw it, and not for this court to do so in the first instance under section 339 of the criminal procedure code.
Judgment:

Ghose and Gordon, JJ.

1. We are of opinion that an application for sanction to prosecute an approver for giving false evidence should be made by motion on behalf of the Grown in open Court, and not by a letter of reference, such as has been submitted by the Sessions Judge in the present case.

2. As to the other recommendation made by the Sessions Judge, we think that it is for the authority, which granted the conditional pardon, to withdraw it, and not for this Court to do so in the first instance under Section 339 of the Criminal Procedure Code.


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