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.

Abbu Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor

Abbu Singh and ors. vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jun 24, 1912
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/478237

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
MRTP

Case Summary

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

Public Gambling Act (111 of 1867), Section 5 - Magistrate, first class--Power to issue search warrant to search a house outside his sub-division--Jurisdiction. -

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abbu Singh and ors.

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
16Ind.Cas.524

Excerpt

public gambling act (111 of 1867), section 5 - magistrate, first class--power to issue search warrant to search a house outside his sub-division--jurisdiction. - .....the first^ applicant, was issued by a magistrate who was not competent to issue it, and, therefore, the discovery of instruments of gaming in the house did not give rise to the presumption that the house was a common gaming house, as defined in the act. section 5 of the act provides that a search warrant may be issued by the magistrate of a district or 'other officer invested which the full powers of a magistrate.' this expression means a magistrate of the first class,--see section 3(2) of the code of criminal procedure. the warrant in the present case was issued by m. muhammad shaffi khan, magistrate of the first class, in the farrukhabad district. in november last, he was appointed to be sub-divisional officer of two tahsils in the district. the house searched is not in either of those tahsils and it is on this account that the warrant is said to be illegal. it appears to me that there is no force in the contention. the officer in question was a magistrate of the first class with jurisdiction extending throughout the district when he was appointed to be a sub divisional officer. the appointment gave him certain additional powers in the area of which he became sub-divisional officer but did not deprive him of all his powers as a magistrate. a sub-divisional magistrate exercises magisterial powers in matters which do not concern his sub-division, and i find nothing in the code which suggests that this practice is contrary to law. it is true, as pointed out by counsel for the appellants, that some of the ordinary powers of a magistrate of the first or second class, who has been appointed to be a sub-divisional officer, cannot be exercised by him except in cases arising in his sub-division or transferred to him by higher authority, but that is on account of the nature of those powers. there are other powers which any magistrate can exercise anywhere in the district, for example, the power to command an unlawful assembly to disperse or the power to record a.....

Full Judgment

Chamier, J.

1. The applicants have been convicted under sections 3 and 4 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867. The only point taken in revision is that the warrant, under which the Police searched the house of the first^ applicant, was issued by a Magistrate who was not competent to issue it, and, therefore, the discovery of instruments of gaming in the house did not give rise to the presumption that the house was a common gaming house, as defined in the Act. Section 5 of the Act provides that a search warrant may be issued by the Magistrate of a District or 'other officer invested which the full powers of a Magistrate.' This expression means a Magistrate of the first class,--see Section 3(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The warrant in the present case was issued by M. Muhammad Shaffi Khan, Magistrate of the first Class, in the Farrukhabad District. In November last, he was appointed to be Sub-Divisional Officer of two Tahsils in the District. The house searched is not in either of those Tahsils and it is on this account that the warrant is said to be illegal. It appears to me that there is no force in the contention. The officer in question was a Magistrate of the first class with jurisdiction extending throughout the District when he was appointed to be a Sub Divisional Officer. The appointment gave him certain additional powers in the area of which he became Sub-Divisional Officer but did not deprive him of all his powers as a Magistrate. A Sub-Divisional Magistrate exercises magisterial powers in matters which do not concern his sub-division, and I find nothing in the Code which suggests that this practice is contrary to law. It is true, as pointed out by Counsel for the appellants, that some of the ordinary powers of a Magistrate of the first or second class, who has been appointed to be a Sub-Divisional Officer, cannot be exercised by him except in cases arising in his sub-division or transferred to him by higher authority, but that is on account of the nature of those powers. There are other powers which any Magistrate can exercise anywhere in the District, for example, the power to command an unlawful assembly to disperse or the power to record a confession. All that Section 5 of the Public Gambling Act requires is that the search warrant shall be issued by the Magistrate of a District or a Magistrate of the first Class. It is impossible to hold that the Magistrate who issued the warrant in the present case was not a Magistrate of the first class. The application is rejected.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial