EMPEROR Vs. COLIN MACKENZIE MACKAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner gave evidence in a case tried by the Chief Presidency Magistrate. Part of his evidence was regarded as false and the learned Magistrate deemed it necessary to take proceedings under Section 476, Criminal P.C. He accordingly drew up a complaint. This complaint he preferred in his own Court and then he transferred it to Mr. Khan, Presidency Magistrate, for disposal. The latter issued process, held an enquiry and committed the petitioner for trial. Objection was taken at the trial that the commitment was illegal, but the presiding Judge, Mr. Justice B.B. Ghose, overruled the objection. The petitioner was then tried and convicted. The learned Advocate-General, under the provisions of Clause 26 of the Letters Patent, has granted a fiat certifying that in his judgment the questions whether under Section 476, Criminal P.C., the Chief Presidency Magistrate was competent to make a complaint to himself or take cognizance of the said case and transfer the same and whether the Third Presidency Magistrate (that is Mr. Khan) was competent, under the law, to commit the accused for trial to the Sessions, should be further considered by the High Court.

(2.) It is worth nothing at the outset that one piece of information given to the learned Advocate-General was incorrect; process was issued by Mr. Khan and not by the Chief Presidency Magistrate himself.

(3.) The contention on behalf of the petitioner is that the Chief Presidency Magistrate's procedure was illegal, and that the commitment and the conviction must necessarily be bad.