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.

Mannu Khan Vs. Chandi Prasad and ors.

Mannu Khan vs Chandi Prasad and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jun 16, 1922
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/482847

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
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 250, whether applicable to enquiry under Section 107. -

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mannu Khan

Respondent

Chandi Prasad and ors.

Legal References

Cases Referred
Empress v. Lakhpat
Reported In
AIR1922All321; 67Ind.Cas.826

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 250, whether applicable to enquiry under section 107. - ryves, j.1. mannu khan laid information before the magistrate in consequence of which action was taken under section 107 of the criminal procedure code against a number of persons. after enquiry, the magistrate discharged these persons under section 119 of the criminal procedure code and held that the complaint made against them was vexatious and frivolous, and ordered the complainant to pay them each rs. 15 as compensation under section 250 of the criminal procedure code. on revision before the learned district magistrate he has referred the case to this court with a recommendation that the order under section 250 be sat aside. section 250 is only applicable in a case instituted by complaint or on information given to a police officer or to a magistrate whereupon a person is accused before a magistrate of 'an offence.' it has been held by this court in ram sukh rai v. mahudeo rai 7 ind. cas. 290 : 7a.l.j. 743 : 11 cr. l.j. 446 that section 250 does not apply to an enquiry under section 107 of the criminal procedure code. that ruling followed an earlier ruling of this court which laid down the came principle, viz., queen-empress v. lakhpat 15 a. 385; a.w.n. (1893) 114 : 7 ind. dec. (n.s.) 952. it seems to me that those cases are in point. i accordingly accept the reference and direct that if the fines ordered to be paid under section 250 have been paid they be refunded, otherwise the order for payment is set aside.

Full Judgment

Ryves, J.

1. Mannu Khan laid information before the Magistrate in consequence of which action was taken under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code against a number of persons. After enquiry, the Magistrate discharged these persons under Section 119 of the Criminal Procedure Code and held that the complaint made against them was vexatious and frivolous, and ordered the complainant to pay them each Rs. 15 as compensation under Section 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On revision before the learned District Magistrate he has referred the case to this Court with a recommendation that the order under Section 250 be sat aside. Section 250 is only applicable in a case instituted by complaint or on information given to a Police Officer or to a Magistrate whereupon a person is accused before a Magistrate of 'an offence.' It has been held by this Court in Ram Sukh Rai v. Mahudeo Rai 7 Ind. Cas. 290 : 7A.L.J. 743 : 11 Cr. L.J. 446 that Section 250 does not apply to an enquiry under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code. That ruling followed an earlier ruling of this Court which laid down the came principle, viz., Queen-Empress v. Lakhpat 15 A. 385; A.W.N. (1893) 114 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 952. It seems to me that those cases are in point. I accordingly accept the reference and direct that if the fines ordered to be paid under Section 250 have been paid they be refunded, otherwise the order for payment is set aside.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial