High CourtsFull Bench

Gopinath vs Kuldip Singh and Others

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 15 May 1885 · Citation: (1885) ILR (Cal) 566

HON’BLE JUDGES
Richard Garth, C.J · Wilson, J · Prinsep, J · O''Kinealy, J · Field, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Registration Act, 1877 — Section 82
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 182 words
1.

It appears that the charge against the accused with which we are now dealing was not made u/s 193 of the Penal Code, but u/s 82 of the Registration Act. It is, therefore, not necessary for the purposes of the case to consider whether, when in holding an enquiry under that Act, the Registrar is acting as a "Court," within the meaning of Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We have only to consider whether before instituting a charge u/s 82, any sanction at all is necessary.

2.

We are of opinion that no sanction is required. It has been contended that, u/s 83 of the Registration Act, it is necessary that some one of the officers who are mentioned in that section must have given previous permission to institute proceedings; but we think that it is not so. The provisions of Section 83 are not obligatory. They rather seem to be intended for the purpose of enabling the officers of the Registration Department, when they should see fit, to institute any prosecution under the Act upon their own responsibility.