Skip to content


Mathura Nath Bhattacharjya Vs. Rajendra Kumar Basu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1924Cal641a,72Ind.Cas.79
AppellantMathura Nath Bhattacharjya
RespondentRajendra Kumar Basu
Cases ReferredBudhu Lal v. Ghattu Gope
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 195(6) - sanction to prosecute--sanction refused by primary court--district judge, power of-- remand, whether justified. - 1. this rule is directed against an order of the district judge of faridpur remanding the case to the lower court for reconsideration of an application for sanction to prosecute. the order of the district judge is passed on fin application under section 195(b), cr.p. code. as has been pointed out in the case on budhu lal v. ghattu gope (1917) 44 cal. 816 the judge acting under that section has no jurisdiction to remand a case to the subordinate court for further enquiry. he must himself decide whether the sanction which was refused by the munsif should be kranted, and he has power for this purpose to take evidence himself, but he has no power to remand the case for further enquiry by the munsif. the rule is also directed against the order of the district judge assessing costs in this.....
Judgment:

1. This Rule is directed against an order of the District Judge of Faridpur remanding the case to the lower Court for reconsideration of an application for sanction to prosecute. The order of the District Judge is passed on fin application under Section 195(b), Cr.P. Code. As has been pointed out in the case on Budhu Lal v. Ghattu Gope (1917) 44 Cal. 816 the Judge acting under that section has no jurisdiction to remand a case to the subordinate Court for further enquiry. He must himself decide whether the sanction which was refused by the Munsif should be kranted, and he has power for this purpose to take evidence himself, but he has no power to remand the case for further enquiry by the Munsif. The Rule is also directed against the order of the District Judge assessing costs in this matter. The learned Vakil for the opposite party does not contest this portion of the Rule.

2. The result is that the Rule is made absolute. The order of the District Judge dated the 23rd August, 1922, remanding the case to the Munsif is set aside and also his order of the 25th August, assessing the costs of the application before him is set aside. The District Judge will now proceed to determine the application under Section 195(b) according to law.

3. Let the record be set down at once.


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