QUEEN-EMPRESS Vs. KUNIYIL RAM
LAWS(PVC)-1900-12-9
PRIVY COUNCIL
Decided on December 17,1900

QUEEN-EMPRESS Appellant
VERSUS
KUNIYIL RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Section 203 of the Criminal P. C. refers to the procedure of a Magistrate who has taken cognizance of a case, Section 196 of the Criminal P. C. debars a Magistrate from taking cognizance of certain offences unless sanction has been obtained. In form, no doubt, the Magistrate before whom, in the present case, the complaint was preferred, purported to dismiss the complaint; under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In substance what he did was to refuse to take cognizance of the offence on the ground that sanction to prosecute was necessary and sanction had not been obtained.
(2.) In the Calcutta cases and in the Allahabad case to which our attention has been called Queen-Empress V/s. Adam Khan I.L.R. 22 All. 106, Nilratan Sen V/s. Jogesh Chundra Bhattacharjee I.L.R. 23 Calc. 983 and Komal Chandra Pal V/s. Gour Chand Audhikari I.L.R. 24 Calc. 286, the Magistrate before whom the first complaint was preferred took cognizance of the alleged offence and after adjudicating upon the case, made an order under Section 203 of the Criminal P. C..
(3.) These cases are clearly distinguishable from the present case.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.