Skip to content


Maharaj Mandal and anr. Vs. Pokak Singh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in6Ind.Cas.198
AppellantMaharaj Mandal and anr.
RespondentPokak Singh
Excerpt:
ferries act(act i b.c. of 1885), sections 6, 16, 28 - declaration of ferry being public--private ferry not to ply within specified distance of public ferry. - .....and the sentence passed on the petitioners should not be set aside on the ground that the limits of the ferry have not been declared under section 6 of the act. it appears that this is the fact of the case. there is nothing to show that the ferry has ever been declared to be a ferry under section 6, or at least the declaration itself has not been produced. the judge tells us that the ferry certainly is a public ferry and has existed over 35 years, and from what he says in the explanation we gather, that the point was not raised at the trial. at the same time the new jerry is not declared under section 6. the limits within which the rights of the owners of the ferry exist have not been and cannot be ascertained.2. under these circumstances, we consider that the conviction cannot.....
Judgment:

1. The petitioners in this case have been convicted of an offence under Section 28 of the Bengal Ferries Act. We have granted a Rule on the Magistrate of the District to show cause why the conviction and the sentence passed on the petitioners should not be set aside on the ground that the limits of the ferry have not been declared under Section 6 of the Act. It appears that this is the fact of the case. There is nothing to show that the ferry has ever been declared to be a ferry under Section 6, or at least the declaration itself has not been produced. The Judge tells us that the ferry certainly is a public ferry and has existed over 35 years, and from what he says in the explanation we gather, that the point was not raised at the trial. At the same time the new Jerry is not declared under Section 6. The limits within which the rights of the owners of the ferry exist have not been and cannot be ascertained.

2. Under these circumstances, we consider that the conviction cannot stand. We accordingly make the Rule absolute arid set aside the conviction.

3. Any money paid in respect of the fine will be refunded.


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