High CourtsSingle Bench(1912) 07 MAD CK 0038

In Re: Angamuthu Vanathrian

Madras High Court · Decided on 29 July 1912 · Citation: 16 Ind. Cas. 522 : (1912) 23 MLJ 732

HON’BLE JUDGES
Miller, 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

3 paragraphs · 130 words

Miller, J.—It has been held by all the High Courts that Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not warrant a District Magistrate in reporting to the High Court the proceedings of a Court of Session. Vide Emperor v. Jamna Bai 2 Cri.L.J. 515 and Queen-Empress v. Karamdi 23 C.k 250. There is an unreported case in the Bombay High Court to the same effect and in this Court: High Court Proceedings, dated 21st September 1895, No. 443.

2.

There is no material difference between the words of Section 438 in the present Code and those of the same section in the former Code of 1882.

3.

The District Magistrate, if he considers the Sessions Judge's order illegal, should move the Public Prosecutor to bring it before this Court.