Queen-empress Vs. Thimmachi

Queen-empress vs Thimmachi

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 16, 1891

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/785527

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/785527
Court: Chennai
Judge: Wilkinson and ;Shephard, JJ.
Decided On: Oct 16, 1891
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Penal Code, Section 186 - Obstructing a public servant--Public vaccinator. -

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Queen-empress

Respondent

Thimmachi

Legal References

Reported In: (1892)ILR15Mad93

Excerpt

penal code, section 186 - obstructing a public servant--public vaccinator. - wilkinson, j.1. i do not think the conviction can be maintained. spreading a false report and thereby preventing people from bringing their children for vaccination does not appear to me to amount to voluntary obstruction of the vaccinator in the performance of his public duties the conviction and sentence should be quashed.shephard, j.2. to prevent by physical means persons willing to be vaccinated from being vaccinated might be obstruction of the vaccinator within the meaning of the section. but merely to dissuade a person from submitting to vaccination is another matter. that is not obstruction, for it is only with regard to willing patients that the vaccinator has any duty. the conviction should be set aside, and the line, if paid, refunded.3. ordered accordingly.

Full Judgment

Wilkinson, J.

1. I do not think the conviction can be maintained. Spreading a false report and thereby preventing people from bringing their children for vaccination does not appear to me to amount to voluntary obstruction of the vaccinator in the performance of his public duties The conviction and sentence should be quashed.

Shephard, J.

2. To prevent by physical means persons willing to be vaccinated from being vaccinated might be obstruction of the vaccinator within the meaning of the Section. But merely to dissuade a person from submitting to vaccination is another matter. That is not obstruction, for it is only with regard to willing patients that the vaccinator has any duty. The conviction should be set aside, and the line, if paid, refunded.

3. Ordered accordingly.

Same Parties Queen-empress vs Thimmachi Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Wilkinson and ;Shephard, JJ.

Criminal