Kolkata Court November 1892 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kali Dassi Vs. Durga Charan Naik
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1892
Reported in: (1893)ILR20Cal351
Prinsep and Ghose, JJ.1. Proceedings under Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be conducted as in a summary trial under Chapter XXII. The evidence should be recorded as provided by Section 355. It is therefore impossible to form any opinion on the proceedings of the Magistrate or the correctness of his order. We observe that the Magistrate in the explanation called for by the Sessions Judge states that 'in these simple and very common cases I do not record much of the evidence.' In this case he has recorded none at all. Consequently a Court of revision is unable to satisfy itself that the order is a proper order. The case must therefore be properly tried....
Chattrapat Singh Vs. Jadukul Prosad Mukerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1892
Reported in: (1893)ILR20Cal673
Pigot and Banerjee, JJ.1. We think that this appeal must be dismissed. By an order made in this case the appellant was held to be not entitled to come in under Section 295 and share in the rateable distribution of the sale-proceeds in this case. That order was made by the Subordinate Judge on the 19th of last March. Application was made to this Court to a Divisional Bench, of which one of the present Bench was a member, for a rule under Section 622 for the purpose of having that order of the 19th of March reviewed; and inasmuch as that order was made in express and direct obedience to the decision of the Court in Deboki Nundun Sen v. Hart I.L.R. 12 Cal. 294 referred to in it, we thought that a rule under Section 622 ought not to be granted in respect of a decision of the lower Court clearly following the law as it stood upon the last decided case. The learned pleader for the appellant has asked us in this case, it being an appeal, to examine the decision in Deboki Nundun Sen v. Hart I....
Baperam Surma Vs. Gouri Nath Dutt
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-02-1892
Reported in: (1893)ILR20Cal474
Pigot and Hill, JJ.1. We think this rule must be discharged. The Deputy Commissioner issued the sanction which has been granted for this prosecution on the 13th of July, as appears by the record, and he did so, as also appears by the record, upon the express application on behalf of the Sub-Inspector against whom the charge of torture had been made, which charge he found, for reasons stated in his judgment, to be false and concocted. It was therefore a sanction given to a contemplated prosecution by a definite person; and here with reference to that matter it is proper to say, as was said in this Bench some weeks ago with reference to sanction for a prosecution, that it does appear to us both that a sanction for a prosecution under Section 195 is not intended by the Code, as it is sometimes treated as being intended, as a sanction given in the abstract, not to any intended prosecutor, not on any application, but a sanction in the abstract which practically may float about the world lik...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›