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
5 paragraphs · 118 wordsThe order of the District Court of 1st February, 1909, so far as it directed that the properties should be entrusted to the petitioner before it, was
not an order authorised by any provision of the Civil Procedure Code. All that is said in Order 21, Rule 55, is that when a certain event has
happened, the attachment should be deemed to have been withdrawn. If follows, therefore, that there was no resistance to the taking of property
by the lawful authority of a public servant and no voluntary obstruction to a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, and, therefore, no
offence u/s 183 or 186, Indian Penal Code. The sanction is set aside.