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.

Salimullah Vs. Birjhan Singh and ors.

Salimullah vs Birjhan Singh and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Nov 16, 1916
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/473464

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
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898,), Sections 202, 203 - Complaint, delay in passing orders on-Magistrate, duty of. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Salimullah

Respondent

Birjhan Singh and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1917All95(1); 37Ind.Cas.639

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898,), sections 202, 203 - complaint, delay in passing orders on-magistrate, duty of. - george knox, j.1. it appears from the papers before me that salimullah applicant on 30th june 1916 filed a complaint before a magistrate of the first class at ballia. the magistrate appears to have put the complaint into his kuteheri box and to have passed no order upon it until the 17th of august 1916. i have in previous cases commented strongly upon such conduct on the part of magistrates and i am surprised to find a magistrate of the first class acting in this way. , magistrates have no right whatever to keep complaints instituted before them without order, as the learned magistrate did in this case. such action is in the highest degree improper and shows want of proper understanding as to what their duties are. the complainant came here on the 21st 6f september and filed an application against the order of the magistrate dismissing the complaint under section 203 of the code criminal procedure. the first two group taken in the application are not entitled weight. if the magistrate had passed order he did in june, whether the order passed had been proper or improper, it would not have been open to attack on these that please.2. there remains the third plea. i have thing before me to show how far the persons were seriously hurt and their injure examined in the hospital. looking to nature of the case, i think it inexpedie after the time that has elapsed to re-open t matter; but i draw the attention of t district magistrate to the complaint and the seriously improper action of the first class magistrate. it will be for the distr; magistrate to consider whether any action should be taken to secure the keeping of t peace and at this stage i leave the case. t application is dismissed.

Full Judgment

George Knox, J.

1. It appears from the papers before me that Salimullah applicant on 30th June 1916 filed a complaint before a Magistrate of the first class at Ballia. The Magistrate appears to have put the complaint into his kuteheri box and to have passed no order upon it until the 17th of August 1916. I have in previous cases commented strongly upon such conduct on the part of Magistrates and I am surprised to find a Magistrate of the first class acting in this way. , Magistrates have no right whatever to keep complaints instituted before them without order, as the learned Magistrate did in this case. Such action is in the highest degree improper and shows want of proper understanding as to what their duties are. The complainant came here on the 21st 6f September and filed an application against the order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 203 of the Code Criminal Procedure. The first two group taken in the application are not entitled weight. If the Magistrate had passed order he did in June, whether the order passed had been proper or improper, it would not have been open to attack on these that please.

2. There remains the third plea. I have thing before me to show how far the persons were seriously hurt and their injure examined in the hospital. Looking to nature of the case, I think it inexpedie after the time that has elapsed to re-open t matter; but I draw the attention of t District Magistrate to the complaint and the seriously improper action of the first class Magistrate. It will be for the Distr; Magistrate to consider whether any action should be taken to secure the keeping of t peace and at this stage I leave the case. T application is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial