High CourtsDivision Bench

In Re: Municipal Committee of Dacca and The Municipal Committee of Dacca

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 25 May 1882 · Citation: (1883) ILR (Cal) 38

HON’BLE JUDGES
Peinsep, J · O''Kinealy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 18

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

1 paragraphs · 156 words

Prinsep, J.—We are of opinion that the Bench of Magistrates had jurisdiction, in a prosecution u/s 216, Beng. Act V of 1876, to determine whether the order which had not been carried out was a proper order,--that is to say, in the present case, whether there had been any encroachment on the road which the accused was bound to remove on the order of a Municipal authority. It has been held, in an analogous case u/s 518 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that, when prosecuted u/s 188, Penal Code, for neglecting to carry out an order of a Magistrate to remove a nuisance, that although that order, if properly made, cannot be questioned in any Court, the accused can, when prosecuted for disobedience of it, claim exemption from its operation on the ground that it was not an order which he was bound to obey, as being an order beyond the Magistrate''s power and jurisdiction.