AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We do not think this is a case for interference.
In the first place the Magistrate, whose action is impugned, gives in our opinion good reasons for his order. But secondly we are disposed to
agree with the view taken in other Courts of Section 88, Criminal Procedure Code. What may be said with regard to that section would equally
apply to Section 386.1 In both cases we think, if the Magistrate errs, the remedy of the aggrieved party is by civil suit. All that we can say is that, in
cases of dispute, the Magistrate should stay the sale of the property seized to give the claimant time to establish his right.
1Warrant for levy of fine
Section 386--Whenever an offender is sentenced to pay a fine, the Court passing the sentence may, in its discretion, issue a warrant for the levy of
the amount by distress and sale of any moveable property belonging to the offender, although the sentence directs that, in default of payment of the
fine, the offender shall be imprisoned.