Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Emperor Vs. Batuk

Emperor vs Batuk

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Dec 03, 1935
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/464921

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - There was however some material upon the record from which the Magistrate might have concluded that there was reliable evidence in support of the denial of the existence of a public way. It is his duty merely to see that there is-some reliable evidence in support of the denial, that is, in other words, to see ...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Emperor

Respondent

Batuk

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1936All142; 160Ind.Cas.889

Excerpt

- - there was however some material upon the record from which the magistrate might have concluded that there was reliable evidence in support of the denial of the existence of a public way. it is his duty merely to see that there is-some reliable evidence in support of the denial, that is, in other words, to see whether there is some evidence which, if not rebutted or explained, would lead to a reasonable conclusion that the public way did not exist......bring any witnesses, the court made the original order absolute. there was however some material upon the record from which the magistrate might have concluded that there was reliable evidence in support of the denial of the existence of a public way. the learned magistrate-appears to have misdirected himself because he appears to have thought that it was necessary for him to decide as a matter of fact whether there was a public way or not. under the provisions of section 139-a, criminal p.c., where a person against whom a provisional order has-been passed under section 133, criminal p.c.,. comes into court and denies the existence of a public way, it is not for the magistrate to come to a definite conclusion whether the denial is valid or not. it is his duty merely to see that there is-some reliable evidence in support of the denial, that is, in other words, to see whether there is some evidence which, if not rebutted or explained, would lead to a reasonable conclusion that the public way did not exist.2. in this case batuk had produced copies of the village records which showed that the alleged obstruction was in certain plots which were recorded as being the property of batuk's wife obtained by her. as a result of a partition. there was also an order passed by a magistrate on a previous occasion in similar proceedings under section 133, criminal p.c., that no public way existed. in these circumstances it was the duty of the magistrate to stay the proceedings until the matter of the existence of the right of way had been decided by a competent civil court. ' i, therefore, set aside the order by which the learned magistrate made his provisional order absolute and i direct that proceedings in the case shall be stayed' until the matter of the existence of the right of way has been decided by a competent civil court.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Allsop, J.

1. The learned Sessions Judge of Mirzapur has made a reference to this Court recommending that an order passed under Section 133, Criminal P.C., by a Magistrate of the first class, should be set aside in revision. The Magistrate passed, a provisional order that one Batuk should remove an unlawful obstruction from a public way. Batuk appeared to oppose this order and put in a written statement in which he said, among other things, that there was no public way at the place where the alleged obstruction had been put up. The Magistrate gave him time-to produce evidence and eventually as he asked for adjournments and did not bring any witnesses, the Court made the original order absolute. There was however some material upon the record from which the Magistrate might have concluded that there was reliable evidence in support of the denial of the existence of a public way. The learned Magistrate-appears to have misdirected himself because he appears to have thought that it was necessary for him to decide as a matter of fact whether there was a public way or not. Under the provisions of Section 139-A, Criminal P.C., where a person against whom a provisional order has-been passed under Section 133, Criminal P.C.,. comes into Court and denies the existence of a public way, it is not for the Magistrate to come to a definite conclusion whether the denial is valid or not. It is his duty merely to see that there is-some reliable evidence in support of the denial, that is, in other words, to see whether there is some evidence which, if not rebutted or explained, would lead to a reasonable conclusion that the public way did not exist.

2. In this case Batuk had produced copies of the village records which showed that the alleged obstruction was in certain plots which were recorded as being the property of Batuk's wife obtained by her. as a result of a partition. There was also an order passed by a Magistrate on a previous occasion in similar proceedings under Section 133, Criminal P.C., that no public way existed. In these circumstances it was the duty of the Magistrate to stay the proceedings until the matter of the existence of the right of way had been decided by a competent civil Court. ' I, therefore, set aside the order by which the learned Magistrate made his provisional order absolute and I direct that proceedings in the case shall be stayed' until the matter of the existence of the right of way has been decided by a competent civil Court.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial