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.

The Empress Vs. Nipcha and anr.

The Empress vs Nipcha and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Dec 02, 1878
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/866341

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.

Sanction to prosecute - Power of District Magistrate to proceed where Prosecutor has not availed himself of the sanction--Amendment of charge--Criminal Procedure Code (Act X of 1872), Section 450 and 470. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Empress

Respondent

Nipcha and anr.

Legal References

Reported In
(1879)ILR4Cal712

Excerpt

sanction to prosecute - power of district magistrate to proceed where prosecutor has not availed himself of the sanction--amendment of charge--criminal procedure code (act x of 1872), section 450 and 470. - tottenham, j.1. it seems to me that the judge is wrong in his law throughout.2. the deputy magistrate did expressly sanction a complaint under section 211, and even took bail for the appearance of the accused. the sanction was none the less valid because the person to whom it was given did not avail himself of it, and sanction having been given, the magistrate of the district was competent, under section 142, code of criminal procedure, to take up the case without a complaint.3. as to the change from section 211 to section 192, the sanction in respect of one offence covers also one under the other on the same facts (ss. 470 and 450, code of criminal procedure).4. but, after all, it would appear that the judge would acquit the prisoners on the merits also. it will be sufficient, therefore, to point out to the judge that his view of the law is erroneous.5. his attention should also be called to the fact that he has omitted to sign the depositions recorded by him as required by para. 2, section 335, code of criminal procedure.

Full Judgment

Tottenham, J.

1. It seems to me that the Judge is wrong in his law throughout.

2. The Deputy Magistrate did expressly sanction a complaint under Section 211, and even took bail for the appearance of the accused. The sanction was none the less valid because the person to whom it was given did not avail himself of it, and sanction having been given, the Magistrate of the district was competent, under Section 142, Code of Criminal Procedure, to take up the case without a complaint.

3. As to the change from Section 211 to Section 192, the sanction in respect of one offence covers also one under the other on the same facts (ss. 470 and 450, Code of Criminal Procedure).

4. But, after all, it would appear that the Judge would acquit the prisoners on the merits also. It will be sufficient, therefore, to point out to the Judge that his view of the law is erroneous.

5. His attention should also be called to the fact that he has omitted to sign the depositions recorded by him as required by para. 2, Section 335, Code of Criminal Procedure.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial