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.

Emperor Vs. Sheikh Idoo

Emperor vs Sheikh Idoo

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided May 24, 1912
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/859959

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.

Jurisdiction of Criminal Court - Order of discharge by the High Court in its original criminal jurisdiction if bar to fresh proceedings--Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 190 (c)--Nolle prosequi--Practice. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Emperor

Respondent

Sheikh Idoo

Legal References

Cases Referred
Mir Ahwad Hossein v. Mahomed Askari
Reported In
(1913)ILR40Cal71,15Ind.Cas.488

Excerpt

jurisdiction of criminal court - order of discharge by the high court in its original criminal jurisdiction if bar to fresh proceedings--criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 190 (c)--nolle prosequi--practice. - holmwood and imam, jj.1. we think that the question raised on this rule can be simply answered by pointing out that the order of discharge made by mr. justice stephen cannot be set aside by any tribunal and does not require to be set aside. * upon all the authorities an order of discharge does not operate as any bar to fresh proceedings being taken before a competent magistrate upon complaint or upon a police report or under section 190 (c) of the criminal procedure code. this was finally settled in the case of mir ahwad hossein v. mahomed askari (1902) i.l.r. 29 calc. 726 by a full bench of this court. if this is the rule of law in the case of presidency and provincial magistrates, where the higher courts have been specially empowered to interfere and order fresh enquiry, and if in. these cases it is unnecessary to set aside the order of discharge or order fresh enquiry, a fortiori it is unnecessary in the case of discharge by the high court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction, where there is no authority that can interfere with the order of discharge. we do not order further enquiry in this case, since-it is unnecessary. it is enough for us to lay down that the magistrate is mistaken in declining jurisdiction which he undoubtedly has, and he is bound to consider and adjudicate on any criminal information property laid before him against the accused.

Full Judgment

Holmwood and Imam, JJ.

1. We think that the question raised on this Rule can be simply answered by pointing out that the order of discharge made by Mr. Justice Stephen cannot be set aside by any tribunal and does not require to be set aside. * Upon all the authorities an order of discharge does not operate as any bar to fresh proceedings being taken before a competent Magistrate upon complaint or upon a Police report or under Section 190 (c) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This was finally settled in the case of Mir Ahwad Hossein v. Mahomed Askari (1902) I.L.R. 29 Calc. 726 by a Full Bench of this Court. If this is the rule of law in the case of Presidency and Provincial Magistrates, where the higher Courts have been specially empowered to interfere and order fresh enquiry, and if in. these cases it is unnecessary to set aside the order of discharge or order fresh enquiry, a fortiori it is unnecessary in the case of discharge by the High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction, where there is no authority that can interfere with the order of discharge. We do not order further enquiry in this case, since-it is unnecessary. It is enough for us to lay down that the Magistrate is mistaken in declining jurisdiction which he undoubtedly has, and he is bound to consider and adjudicate on any criminal information property laid before him against the accused.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial