Skip to content


Guru Prasanna Roy Vs. Har (Hari) Kumar Majumdar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in50Ind.Cas.817
AppellantGuru Prasanna Roy
RespondentHar (Hari) Kumar Majumdar and anr.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), sections 107, 125 - proceedings under section 107 transferred from one district to another--jurisdiction of district magistrate to cancel bonds. - .....a were taken against the 2nd party in the district of noakhally under section 107 of the criminal procedure code. by an order of this court the case was transferred to the district of tipperah arid mr. h.k. das gupta, first class magistrate, ordered the 2nd party to be bound down to keep the peace. the 2nd party applied to the district magistrate to cancel the bond under section 125 of the criminal procedure code and the district magistrate of tipperah has, after consideration of the evidence in the case, come to the conclusion that the order of mr. h.k. dus gupta was wrong on the merits and he has accordingly set it aside.2. this rule was obtained by the first party calling upon the district magistrate of tipperah to show cause why the order complained of should not be set.....
Judgment:

1. In this case proceeding a were taken against the 2nd party in the district of Noakhally under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code. By an order of this Court the case was transferred to the district of Tipperah arid Mr. H.K. Das Gupta, First Class Magistrate, ordered the 2nd party to be bound down to keep the peace. The 2nd party applied to the District Magistrate to cancel the bond under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the District Magistrate of Tipperah has, after consideration of the evidence in the case, come to the conclusion that the order of Mr. H.K. Dus Gupta was wrong on the merits and he has accordingly set it aside.

2. This Rule was obtained by the first party calling upon the District Magistrate of Tipperah to show cause why the order complained of should not be set aside.

3. It is contended in support of this Bale that the Magistrate empowered to deal with a matter of this kind under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code, is the Magistrate in whose district the breach of the peace is apprehended. That section, it is urged, contemplates ordinary cases where proceeding a are taken and orders passed by a Magistrate in the district in which a breach of the peace is apprehended and does not contemplate a special case like this, where the proceedings are transferred from one district to another. This argument no doubt has its weight and we might have given effect to it if the words of the section were less clear. But we think that having regard to the words of the section, we cannot hold that the District Magistrate of Tippeiah has acted without jurisdiction. The material words of the section are that the Magistrate of a district may cancel any bond executed by an order of any Court iii his district not superior to his Court, Here the order for keeping the peace was passed by a Magistrate in the district of Tipperah not superior to the Court of the District Magistrate and it seems to us quite clear that it was the District Magistrate of Tipperah alone who had jurisdiction to pass an order under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code.

4. We think, therefore, that this Rule should be discharged and we order accordingly.


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