Skip to content


Nazir Ahmad Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtPrivy Council
Decided On
Case NumberPetition for special leave to appeal to Privy Council
Judge
Reported inAIR1936PC253(1)
AppellantNazir Ahmad
RespondentEmperor
Advocates:C. Sidney Smith, for Appellant; W. Wallach, for the Crown. Solicitors for Appellant, H.S.L. Polak and Co.; Solicitor for Respondent, The Solicitor, India Office.
Excerpt:
.....the very exceptional circumstances in which alone they will humbly advise his majesty to grant leave to appeal in a criminal case. they would not have it supposed that the advice which they propose to tender to his majesty in this case indicates any weakening on their part of the most salutary judicial rule which prevents this board from entertaining such applications, the board not being a court of criminal appeal, except in the most exceptional circumstances. what actuates the board in advising his majesty to grant leave to appeal in thus instance is that it appears that with reference to a section of the criminal procedure code, which is of vital importance to accused persons, there has been a difference of opinion in the high courts of india which, however it be resolved, ought.....
Judgment:

LORD BLANESBURGH:

Their Lordships desire to re-affirm in this case the very exceptional circumstances in which alone they will humbly advise His Majesty to grant leave to appeal in a criminal case. They would not have it supposed that the advice which they propose to tender to His Majesty in this case indicates any weakening on their part of the most salutary judicial rule which prevents this Board from entertaining such applications, the Board not being a Court of Criminal Appeal, except in the most exceptional circumstances. What actuates the Board in advising His Majesty to grant leave to appeal in thus instance is that it appears that with reference to a section of the Criminal Procedure Code, which is of vital importance to accused persons, there has been a difference of opinion in the High Courts of India which, however it be resolved, ought to be resolved so that in the future there will be no doubt as to the law declared by that section. It is not a case of a view being taken by the High Court in the case under appeal, which, whether the view was right or wrong, would not be in the circumstances any justification for this Board entertaining an application for special leave to appeal; it is a case in which there is a pronounced difference of opinion on this most important question amongst some of the High Courts in India, and it is because their Lordships think that it would be salutary that that doubt and difference of opinion should be finally resolved, that in this case they will humbly advise His Majesty to grant special leave to appeal.

Special leave granted.


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