High CourtsDivision Bench(1878) 03 CAL CK 0006

The Empress vs Kudrutoollah and Others

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 22 March 1878

HON’BLE JUDGES
L.S. Jackson, J · Cunningham, 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

2 paragraphs · 131 words

L.S. Jackson, J.—"Trial," according to the definition in Section 4 of the Criminal Procedure Code, means "the proceedings taken in Court after a charge has been drawn up." It is clear, therefore, that Section 221 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which follows Section 220, authorises a Magistrate, although a charge may have been drawn up, to stop further proceedings and commit for trial: for this purpose Section 221 may be regarded as a proviso to Section 220. It may be added that, though the explanation to Section 220 provides that if a charge is drawn up, the prisoner must be either convicted or acquitted, it does not require that the conviction or acquittal should be by the Magistrate who drew it.

2.

We see no reason, therefore, to quash the commitment.