High CourtsDivision Bench

Hiraman De vs Ram Kumar Ain

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 14 October 1890 · Citation: (1891) ILR (Cal) 186

HON’BLE JUDGES
Wilson, J · Prinsep, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (CrPC) — Section 438
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

3 paragraphs · 128 words

Prinsep, J.—We decline to consider this reference as a Court of Revision. The Sessions Judge as the Court of Appeal has rejected the appeal, and the District Magistrate has afterwards, notwithstanding the finality of that order by a superior Court, raised the objection as to the jurisdiction of the Subordinate Magistrate. An objection in this form is not sustainable. If the District Magistrate is inclined to move further in the matter, he should proceed through the Legal Remembrancer.

2.

We would direct his attention to the observations of Straight, J., in Queen-Empress v. Shere Singh ILR All 362

3.

The District Magistrate not being competent to refer such a case u/s 438 had no authority to admit the accused to bail. He should therefore be remitted to jail.