Skip to content


Queen-empress Vs. Pratap Chunder Ghose - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1898)ILR25Cal852
AppellantQueen-empress
RespondentPratap Chunder Ghose
Cases Referred and Ananda Chundra Bhuttacharjee v. Stephen
Excerpt:
nuisance - criminal procedure code (act x of 1882), section 144--order regulating boat traffic at a landing place--high court's power of revision when order cannot be made under that section. - .....of the section. that being so, the order is-not authorised by the provisions of the law under which it purports to have been made, and there is no other law that we are aware of, under which the magistrate could make such an order, nor does the mere fact of the order purporting to be made under section 144 of the criminal procedure code prevent this court from interfering with it in revision, if the order is one that cannot be made under that section. the view we take is amply supported by the cases of abhayeswari debi v. sidheswari debi (1888) i.l.r. 16 cal. 80 and ananda chundra bhuttacharjee v. stephen (1891) i.l.e. 16 cal. 127.2. we, therefore, set aside the order complained of as not authorized by law.
Judgment:

Maclean, C.J., and Banerjee, J.

1. We agree with the learned Sessions Judge in thinking that an order like the one made in this case regulating the boat traffic at a certain landing place, in the manner directed by the order, is not an order that is authorized by Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The very terms of the order go to show that it is not one directing 'any person to abstain from, a certain act or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his management 'within the meaning of the Section. That being so, the order is-not authorised by the provisions of the law under which it purports to have been made, and there is no other law that we are aware of, under which the Magistrate could make such an order, nor does the mere fact of the order purporting to be made under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code prevent this Court from interfering with it in revision, if the order is one that cannot be made under that Section. The view we take is amply supported by the cases of Abhayeswari Debi v. Sidheswari Debi (1888) I.L.R. 16 Cal. 80 and Ananda Chundra Bhuttacharjee v. Stephen (1891) I.L.E. 16 Cal. 127.

2. We, therefore, set aside the order complained of as not authorized by law.


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