High Courts

Munna Lal Chowdhry vs Padman Misser

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 14 May 1903 · Citation: (1903) 05 CAL CK 0026

CASE NUMBER
Civil Rule No. 64 of 1903
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 · 227 words

Banerjee and Pargiter, JJ.—After hearing the learned vakils on both sides, we are of opinion that this Rule must be discharged on the simple ground that the application of the Petitioner, which is evidently an application under Sub-section 6 of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ought to have been made to the Commissioner of the Bhagalpur Division and not to this Court, regard being had to the provisions of Section 15 of Regulation V of 1893 and Sub-section 7, Clause (a) of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By Sub-section 6 of Section 195 any sanction given or refused under this section may be revoked or granted by any authority to which the authority giving or refusing it is subordinate; and Sub-section 7 says: "For the purposes of this section every Court shall be deemed to be subordinate only to the Court to which appeals from the former Court ordinarily lie that is to say, where such appeals lie to more than one Court, the Appellate Court of inferior jurisdiction shall be the Court to which such Court shall Be deemed to be subordinate." That makes the Court of the Commissioner of the Bhagalpur Division the proper Court to which to make the application.

2.

That being so, we cannot entertain the present application and the Rule must be discharged with costs.