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.

Sheo Progash Tewari Vs. Bhoop NaraIn Prosad Pathak and anr.

Sheo Progash Tewari vs Bhoop NaraIn Prosad Pathak and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Mar 14, 1895
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/856471

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
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Sections 21 and 186 - Escape from arrest--Nazir's power of delegation--Public servant. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sheo Progash Tewari

Respondent

Bhoop NaraIn Prosad Pathak and anr.

Legal References

Cases Referred
Queen v. Bhagas Dafadar
Reported In
(1895)ILR22Cal759

Excerpt

penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 21 and 186 - escape from arrest--nazir's power of delegation--public servant. - w. comer petheram, c.j. and beverley, j.1. we are of opinion that this case cannot be distinguished from the case of dharam chand lal v. queen-empress (ante, p. 596) decided by a bench of this court on the 6th instant, and this rule must, therefore, be discharged.2. the point whether the escape of a prisoner from arrest is or is not an obstruction of a public servant within the meaning of section 186 of the penal code does not arise in this case, as it was proved that the petitioner being present abetted four other persons in obstructing a public servant.3. we may refer to the case of queen v. bhagas dafadar 2 b.l.r. f.b. 21 as showing that a peon of a court of justice, whose duty it is to execute any judicial process, is a public servant within the meaning of the definition in section 21 of the penal code, clause 4.

Full Judgment

W. Comer Petheram, C.J. and Beverley, J.

1. We are of opinion that this case cannot be distinguished from the case of Dharam Chand Lal v. Queen-Empress (ante, p. 596) decided by a Bench of this Court on the 6th instant, and this rule must, therefore, be discharged.

2. The point whether the escape of a prisoner from arrest is or is not an obstruction of a public servant within the meaning of Section 186 of the Penal Code does not arise in this case, as it was proved that the petitioner being present abetted four other persons in obstructing a public servant.

3. We may refer to the case of Queen v. Bhagas Dafadar 2 B.L.R. F.B. 21 as showing that a peon of a Court of Justice, whose duty it is to execute any judicial process, is a public servant within the meaning of the definition in Section 21 of the Penal Code, Clause 4.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial