Chathu Rai Vs. Niranjan Rai

Chathu Rai vs Niranjan Rai

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided May 09, 1893

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/854894

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/854894
Court: Kolkata
Judge: Trevelyan and ;Rampini, JJ.
Decided On: May 09, 1893
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code (Act X of 1882), Section 145, 437 - 'Complaint'--District Magistrate, power of, to order further enquiry--Dispute concerning land--power to order enquiry. -

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chathu Rai

Respondent

Niranjan Rai

Legal References

Reported In: (1893)ILR20Cal729

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act x of 1882), section 145, 437 - 'complaint'--district magistrate, power of, to order further enquiry--dispute concerning land--power to order enquiry. - trevelyan and rampini, jj.1. in this case the learned counsel in support of the order of the magistrate has only been able to refer us to section 437, code of criminal procedure, in support of the power of the magistrate to make the order which he had passed. now, that section only allows a further enquiry into a complaint. a complaint means a complaint of an offence [section 4 (a), criminal procedure code], and an offence is defined in the code as 'any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force.' we think it is quite clear that section 437, which enables a magistrate to make an order for further enquiry does not authorize him to order a further enquiry in a case under section 145, which is not directed to any offence at all. that being so, we think that this rule must be made absolute, and that the orders dated the 9th february and 24th february should be set aside.

Full Judgment

Trevelyan and Rampini, JJ.

1. In this case the learned Counsel in support of the order of the Magistrate has only been able to refer us to Section 437, Code of Criminal Procedure, in support of the power of the Magistrate to make the order which he had passed. Now, that section only allows a further enquiry into a complaint. A complaint means a complaint of an offence [Section 4 (a), Criminal Procedure Code], and an offence is defined in the Code as 'any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force.' We think it is quite clear that Section 437, which enables a Magistrate to make an order for further enquiry does not authorize him to order a further enquiry in a case under Section 145, which is not directed to any offence at all. That being so, we think that this rule must be made absolute, and that the orders dated the 9th February and 24th February should be set aside.

Same Parties Chathu Rai vs Niranjan Rai Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Trevelyan and ;Rampini, JJ.

Criminal