Posted On by &filed under Calcutta High Court, High Court.


Calcutta High Court
The Empress vs Gangadhur Bhunjo And Ors. on 16 April, 1878
Equivalent citations: (1878) ILR 3 Cal 622
Author: Prinsep
Bench: Markby, Prinsep


JUDGMENT

Prinsep, J.

1. These cases have been submitted to us by the Sessions Judge of Midnapore, because sentences of fine have been imposed by the Magistrate of the Division of Contai for breaches of the stamp law contrary to the rule laid down in the case of the Queen v. Nadi Chanel Poddar 24 W.R. Cr. Rul. 1.

2. It appears that the Collector authorized this officer, under Section 43 of the Stamp Act, to institute and conduct the prosecution in these cases. Under these circumstances we think that he was not competent also to try them. Any possible inconvenience might have been obviated by the Collector’s employing the Government pleader or some other person to conduct the prosecution under Section 43. We quash the convictions and sentences, and direct that the fines, if paid, be refunded.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

75 queries in 0.377 seconds.