Karim Buksh vs The Queen-Empress on 5 September, 1888
With regard to the interpretation to be placed upon the two
phrases used in s. 211 Wilson, J., who delivered judgment of
the court in that case observed, inter alia:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.21 seconds)S.N. Bannerjee And Secretary Of State vs Kurchwar Lime And Stone Company, ... on 31 October, 1938
In support of the contention that it
is not a criminal proceeding, Mr. Sarjoo Prasad has placed
reliance upon the decision of the Privy Council in S. N.
Bannerjee v. Kuchwar Lime and Stone Co., Ltd.(1).
The Empress vs In The Matter Of The Petition Of Jamoona on 22 January, 1881
plaint against the appellants under ss. 211 and 199 I.P.C.
and/or any other appropriate section to the Chief Presidency
Magistrate, Calcutta. In pursuance of this direction the
Registrar lodged a complaint on January 16, 1959 under ss.
193, 199 and 211, I.P.C. in the court of the Chief
Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta. The appellants made an
application before the High Court under Arts. 133(1)(c) and
134(1)(c) of the Constitution for grant of a certificate of
fitness for appeal to this Court. By Order dated May 8,
1959 the High Court granted the certificate, overruling the
objections made on behalf of the respondents. The ground on
which the High Court granted the certificate was that the
decision in The Empress v. Jamoona(1) where it was held that
for a conviction under s. 211 of the Penal Code it was
necessary that the false charge should have been made to a
Court or an officer having jurisdiction to investigate and
send it up for trial, was not noticed by the High Court.
With regard to the objection raised on behalf of the
respondents that the order of the High Court directing that
a complaint be lodged was not a final order, the High Court
held that whether it is a final order or not is not free
from doubt and that the benefit of that doubt ought to be
given to the appellants.
1