SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/330114 |
Subject | Criminal |
Court | Mumbai |
Decided On | Jul-11-1878 |
Judge | Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ. |
Reported in | (1878)ILR2Bom653 |
Appellant | In Re: Muse Ali Adam |
Notice (8): Undefined variable: kword [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 120]Code Contextecho "<div class='table-bordered'><b>Excerpt:</b><br/>";
if (trim($desc['Judgement']['casenote'])) {
echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['casenote']))), $query);
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = ''include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 120 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 120]code of criminal procedure (act x of 1872), section 210 - sanction--complainant--withdrawal--indian penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 183. - section 31(4) (since repealed) :[tarun chatterjee & h.l.dattu, jj] jurisdiction of high court - respondent, a government company, chartered appellants vessel to carry rock phosphate from togo to west coast india - dispute arose between parties - under agreement, respondent had chosen mumbai as port of delivery vessel carrying rock phosphate was delivered at port of bombay - application filed by respondent earlier before delhi high court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise held, high court of bombay, is not correct in rejecting arbitration petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of.....Code Contextecho "<div class='table-bordered'><b>Excerpt:</b><br/>";
if (trim($desc['Judgement']['casenote'])) {
echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['casenote']))), $query);
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = ''include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 120 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: kword [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]Code Context}
//highest occurence of word in the judgement
echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = ''include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]kemball, j.1. the court concurs with the opinion of the magistrate of the district. the offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the court whose authority had been resisted. in such a case the complainant spoken of in section 210 of the code of criminal procedure, must be deemed to be the court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.2. the court annuls the order of the subordinate magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and.....Code Context}
//highest occurence of word in the judgement
echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = ''include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');
}
echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = '' $content = array( (int) 0 => '<p>Kemball, J.', (int) 1 => '<p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.', (int) 2 => '<p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p>', (int) 3 => '<p>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 4 $i = (int) 0include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Kemball, J.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');
}
echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = '' $content = array( (int) 0 => '<p>Kemball, J.', (int) 1 => '<p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.', (int) 2 => '<p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p>', (int) 3 => '<p>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 4 $i = (int) 1include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');
}
echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = '' $content = array( (int) 0 => '<p>Kemball, J.', (int) 1 => '<p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.', (int) 2 => '<p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p>', (int) 3 => '<p>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 4 $i = (int) 2include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');
}
echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">Kemball, J.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p style="text-align: justify;"></p><p style="text-align: justify;">', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 're-muse-ali-adam', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'In Re Muse Ali Adam - Citation 330114 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '330114', 'acts' => '', 'appealno' => '', 'appellant' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'authreffered' => '', 'casename' => 'In Re: Muse Ali Adam', 'casenote' => 'Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1872), Section 210 - Sanction--Complainant--Withdrawal--Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 183. - Section 31(4) (since repealed) :[Tarun Chatterjee & H.L.Dattu, JJ] Jurisdiction of High Court - Respondent, a Government Company, chartered appellants vessel to carry Rock Phosphate from Togo to West Coast India - Dispute arose between parties - Under agreement, respondent had chosen Mumbai as port of delivery Vessel carrying Rock Phosphate was delivered at port of Bombay - Application filed by respondent earlier before Delhi High Court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise Held, High Court of Bombay, is not correct in rejecting Arbitration Petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. ', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => '', 'citingcases' => '', 'counselplain' => '', 'counseldef' => '', 'court' => 'Mumbai', 'court_type' => 'PC', 'decidedon' => '1878-07-11', 'deposition' => '', 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => 'Kemball and ;Pinhey, JJ.', 'judgement' => '<p>Kemball, J.</p><p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.</p><p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p></p><p>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => '', 'pubs' => '(1878)ILR2Bom653', 'ratiodecidendi' => '', 'respondent' => '', 'sub' => 'Criminal', 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 're-muse-ali-adam' $args = array( (int) 0 => '330114', (int) 1 => 're-muse-ali-adam' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/330114/re-muse-ali-adam' $ctype = '' $content = array( (int) 0 => '<p>Kemball, J.', (int) 1 => '<p>1. The Court concurs with the opinion of the Magistrate of the District. The offence charged was one of 'contempt of the lawful authority of a public servant,' and no proceedings could have been instituted against the offender without the sanction of the Court whose authority had been resisted. In such a case the complainant spoken of in Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be deemed to be the Court resisted, and not the person injured through the resistance. Therefore, to make the withdrawal of such a complaint, as that under consideration, legal, it must be based on the application alone of the Court or authority sanctioning the proceedings.', (int) 2 => '<p>2. The Court annuls the order of the Subordinate Magistrate, permitting the withdrawal of the charge in this case, and directs the Magistrate to proceed with the trial, and dispose of the case according to law.<p>', (int) 3 => '<p>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 4 $i = (int) 3include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109