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.

Bhiku HosseIn Vs. Emperor

Bhiku Hossein vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Apr 18, 1912
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/858393

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.

Magistrate, jurisdiction of - Deputy Magistrate in charge of the office of the District Magistrate at head-quarters--Subordination of the Sub-divisional Magistrate to such Deputy Magistrate--Power of latter after taking cognizance and examining the complainant on oath to direct a local investigation by the former--I...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bhiku Hossein

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
(1912)ILR39Cal1041

Excerpt

magistrate, jurisdiction of - deputy magistrate in charge of the office of the district magistrate at head-quarters--subordination of the sub-divisional magistrate to such deputy magistrate--power of latter after taking cognizance and examining the complainant on oath to direct a local investigation by the former--irregularity, effect of--power of the same to dismiss the complaint, and order the prosecution of the complainant, on evidence taken at the investigation and on the report of the subdivisional officer--criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), sections 12, 202, 203, 476 and 529(f). - holmwood and imam, jj.1. this was a reference made by the learned sessions judge of dinajpore recommending that the order passed by the deputy magistrate at head-quarters, under section 476 of the criminal procedure code, directing the trial of the complainant under section 211 and sending the case to the district magistrate for orders, should be set aside. at the same time he informed us that there was a motion before him to order farther enquiry into the matter. he did not think it proper to deal with it himself, because it might prejudice our order in regard to the matter under section 476 of the criminal procedure code. he says it seemed to him that the proper course to take was to submit this reference for decision before proceeding to dispose of the other motion.2. we need not, therefore, go into the point of the necessity for further enquiry under section 203, as we have dealt with it in a similar case to this in a some-what lengthy judgment delivered this morning in which we pointed out that the government circular with regard to enquiries into complaints against police officers has been greatly misunderstood, that circular cannot be held to refer to any kind of local investigation under section 202 of the criminal procedure code, and that the local investigation which it mentions is a full and complete judicial enquiry on the spot after process issued and hearing witnesses on both sides and taking the explanation of the accused person.

Full Judgment

Holmwood and Imam, JJ.

1. This was a Reference made by the learned Sessions Judge of Dinajpore recommending that the order passed by the Deputy Magistrate at head-quarters, under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code, directing the trial of the complainant under Section 211 and sending the case to the District Magistrate for orders, should be set aside. At the same time he informed us that there was a motion before him to order farther enquiry into the matter. He did not think it proper to deal with it himself, because it might prejudice our order in regard to the matter under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He says it seemed to him that the proper course to take was to submit this Reference for decision before proceeding to dispose of the other motion.

2. We need not, therefore, go into the point of the necessity for further enquiry under Section 203, as we have dealt with it in a similar case to this in a some-what lengthy judgment delivered this morning in which we pointed out that the Government Circular with regard to enquiries into complaints against Police officers has been greatly misunderstood, that Circular cannot be held to refer to any kind of local investigation under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and that the local investigation which it mentions is a full and complete judicial enquiry on the spot after process issued and hearing witnesses on both sides and taking the explanation of the accused person.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial