High CourtsDivision Bench(1913) 09 MAD CK 0018

Gangu Reddi vs C. Samarapathy Mudali

Madras High Court · Decided on 19 September 1913 · Citation: (1915) ILR (Mad) 512 : (1913) 25 MLJ 510

HON’BLE JUDGES
Oldfield, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 346 words

Oldfield, J.—A preliminary objection has been taken that the petition will not lie under the Criminal Procedure with reference to Debi Bux

Shroff v. Jutmal Dungarwell ILR (1899) C. 126 and previous cases including Charoobala Dabee v. Barendranth Mozumdar (1906) T.L.R. 33 C.

1282,

2.

The course of authority in Calcutta has not been consistent. In this Presidency the point was raised in the case reported at VI Weir 255, but was

not decided. I have however allowed the petitioner to amend his petition by inserting a reference to Section 15 of the Charter Act. And, as I find

that it can be supported on the merits with reference to that provision it is not necessary to decide whether I have jurisdiction under the Criminal

Procedure Code also.

3.

The petitioner charged the accused with offences punishable under Sections 498 and 497 I. P. C, The Magistrate declined to grant summons, in

effect dismissing the complaint u/s 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code. His recorded reasons included nothing resembling a finding that the

charges were false. They were only that gross delay had occurred and that the charges were made for ulterior and improper motives. Section 203

authorises the Magistrates to dismiss in case he finds no sufficient ground for proceeding. But the decision whether there is sufficient ground must

be reached by the exercise of discretion, based on judicial considerations. That the Magistrate considered the probable result of proceeding

undesirable or the motives and conduct of the complainant discreditable are not relevant considerations. In the matter of the Petition of Ganesh

Narayun Satte (1889) I.L E. 13 B. 590. In the absence of any finding that the complaint was false or unsustainable on the evidence likely to be

available, the passing of the order of dismissal constituted an irregularity with which this Court has u/s 15 of the Charter Act jurisdiction to deal.

4.

The order must be set aside and the complaint remanded to the Chief Presidency Magistrate for disposal according to law by him or such other

Presidency Magistrate as he may direct.