Skip to content


R.T. Hopcroft Vs. the Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1Ind.Cas.737
AppellantR.T. Hopcroft
RespondentThe Emperor
Cases Referred and Jhoja Singh v. Queen
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), sections 107 and 443 - european british subject--'enquire into or try any charge' applicable to case under section 107. - .....matter under section 443 of criminal procedure code.2. under section 443 of the criminal procedure code no magistrate, unless he is a justice of the peace, and (except in the case of a district magistrate or presidency magistrate) unless he is a magistrate of the first class and a european british subject, shall inquire into or try any charge against a european british subject.3. from the explanation submitted by the magistrate there is nothing to show that the petitioner is not a european british-born subject, and we are told that the matter was not at all disputed. the question is whether the expression inquire into or try any charge' applies to proceedings under section 107 or not.4. the party, against whom proceedings under section 107 of the criminal procedure code are instituted,.....
Judgment:

1. This is a Rule on the District Magistrate of Muzaffarpore to show cause why the case should not be transferred from the file of the trying Magistrate to that of any other Magistrate competent to try the same, on the ground that the trying Magistrate had no jurisdiction to inquire into the matter under Section 443 of Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Under Section 443 of the Criminal Procedure Code no Magistrate, unless he is a Justice of the Peace, and (except in the case of a District Magistrate or Presidency Magistrate) unless he is a Magistrate of the first class and a European British subject, shall inquire into or try any charge against a European British subject.

3. From the Explanation submitted by the Magistrate there is nothing to show that the petitioner is not a European British-born subject, and we are told that the matter was not at all disputed. The question is whether the expression inquire into or try any charge' applies to proceedings under Section 107 or not.

4. The party, against whom proceedings under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code are instituted, is in the position of an accused party, and when he is bound over to keep the peace, his liberty is, to a very great extent, qualified. In Queen-Empress v. Mutsaddi Lal (1) 21 A. 107, it was held that a person, against whom proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure are being taken, is an accused person' within the meaning of Section 437 of the Code. It appears from this case that the learned Judge, who tried it, followed Queen-Empress v. Mona Puna, 16 B. 661 and Jhoja Singh v. Queen-Empress 23 C. 493.

5. If, therefore, the petitioner in an accused person, his case certainly comes under Section 443 of the Criminal Procedure Code and, as a European British-born subject, is entitled to claim that he should be tried by a Justice of the Peace or a District Magistrate or Presidency Magistrate, provided the Justice of the Peace is a Magistrate of the first class and a European British-born subject.

6. In the above circumstances we make the Rule absolute, and direct that the District Magistrate do transfer the case to any Magistrate competent to try the petitioner.


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