Singhasan Rai and Others vs The King

Agarwala, C.J.—The convictions in this case must be set aside on a very simple ground. The petitioners have been convicted and sentenced u/s 186 of the Penal Code, that is to say, for obstructing a public servant in the discharge of his functions. The public servant concerned is a pleader commissioner appointed by the Court to remove certain obstructions, which, under the decree of the Court, are said to have been ordered to be removed. The petitioners are not parties to the decree. Unfortunately, the prosecution have entirely omitted to prove the writ under which the Commissioner was acting, and so it is impossible to say what his public functions were, and, therefore, it is impossible to say that there has been any obstruction to the commissioner in the discharge of his public function. This is only typical of the manner in which prosecutions are conducted in this province, where so many important cases entirely fail because of the carelessness displayed in proving the matters which ought to be proved. The convictions and sentences are set aside.