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
9 paragraphs · 180 wordsIn this case the Acting Joint Magistrate of Madura transferred a complaint of a coffee theft from the Second-class Magistrate of Kodaikanal to
the Taluk Magistrate of Periaculam. But the Acting District Magistrate being of opinion that there were no sufficient grounds for the transfer, but
that on the contrary there were very good grounds against it, withdrew the case from the file of the Taluk Magistrate and transferred it back to that
of the Kodaikanal Sub-Magistrate. It is contended that the District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to order the retransfer u/s 528, Criminal
Procedure Code.
We are, however, of opinion that a Magistrate, who is subordinate to a Sub-Division Magistrate, is also subordinate to the District Magistrate
within the meaning of Section 528. Neither Section 17, which declares such Magistrate to be subject only to the general control of the District
Magistrate, nor Schedule III which specifies the ordinary powers of a District Magistrate, can be so construed as to take away the special power
conferred by Section 528. We decline to interfere and dismiss this petition.