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.

Dukhi Vs. Emperor

Dukhi vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Apr 26, 1923
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/481532

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 1895), Section 349 - Trial by Second Class Magistrate--Reference to Joint Magistrate--Joint Magistrate, power of. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dukhi

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1924All141; 74Ind.Cas.448

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1895), section 349 - trial by second class magistrate--reference to joint magistrate--joint magistrate, power of. - daniels, j.1. this case has been referred by the learned sessions judge at allahabad on the ground that an order under section 106 of the code of criminal procedure was passed without jurisdiction. a case under sections 352 and 506 of the indian penal code was before a magistrate of the second class. being of opinion that the accused should be bound over under section 106 of the code of criminal procedure, he referred the case to, the joint magistrate. the joint magistrate passed an order under section 106 but did not deal with the substantive charge and on his sending the record back the accused were convicted by the second class magistrate in whose court the case originally was. under these circumstances, the learned sessions judge is right in saying that the joint magistrate acted without jurisdiction. the learned sessions judge appears to be of opinion that the order was a proper order on the merits but he has not thought it necessary, to ask this court to restore the order in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under section 106(3) of the code of criminal procedure. i accept the reference and set aside the order passed under section 106.

Full Judgment

Daniels, J.

1. This case has been referred by the learned Sessions Judge at Allahabad on the ground that an order under Section 106 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was passed without jurisdiction. A case under sections 352 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code was before a Magistrate of the Second Class. Being of opinion that the accused should be bound over under Section 106 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he referred the case to, the Joint Magistrate. The Joint Magistrate passed an order under Section 106 but did not deal with the substantive charge and on his sending the record back the accused were convicted by the Second Class Magistrate in whose Court the case originally was. Under these circumstances, the learned Sessions Judge is right in saying that the Joint Magistrate acted without jurisdiction. The learned Sessions Judge appears to be of opinion that the order was a proper order on the merits but he has not thought it necessary, to ask this Court to restore the order in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 106(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I accept the reference and set aside the order passed under Section 106.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial