AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Spencer, J.—We are of opinion that no appeal lies in this case against the order passed u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by a
single Judge of this Court.
Orders made u/s 133 and connected sections are not excluded from the operation of Section 435 and there is no good reason for treating
orders passed under this Chapter X which deals with public nuisances and prescribes that the procedure shall be that of a summons case, as not
orders passed1 in a criminal trial within the words of Section 15 of the Letters-Patent Act.
It is argued on the authority of Hirananda Ojha v. The Emperor 9 C.W.N. 983 that cases where the person against whom proceedings are
taken can give evidence on his own behalf are cases of a quasi-civil nature; but in proceedings u/s 488 persons against whom orders of
maintenance are applied for are permitted to tender themselves as witnesses and yet they are styled ''accused.'' Assuming that a counter-petitioner
in proceedings under Chapter X is a competent witness on his own behalf this fact will not in our opinion render the proceedings any less a criminal
trial. We dismiss this appeal.