PARAMASIVAM CHETTIAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH several points were raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, only one point was pressed be. fore me, viz., that First Class Magistrate (Executive), Pattukottai, had no jurisdiction to tender pardon to the two approvers, as the sanction obtained by him from the Additional District Magistrate, Tanjore, was invalid.

(2.) WHAT happened in this case was the First Class Magistrate of Pattukottai during the investigation of the case/tendered pardon under Section 337(1), Criminal P.C. to two approvers on the sanction given by the Additional District Magistrate. It is contended by the learned Counsel that the Additional District Magistrate had no powers to accord sanction to the First Class Magistrate for tendering pardon under Section 337(1) , Criminal P.C. To appreciate the contention of the learned Counsel, it is necessary to set out the relevant provision of the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 337, Clause (1), Criminal Procedure Code is as follows:

(3.) In this case, it is not disputed that the State Government appointed the Collector of Tanjore as the Additional District Magistrate under Section 10(2), Criminal P.C. and conferred all the powers exercisable by the District Magistrate under the Code. The ordinary powers of the District Magistrate are enumerated in Schedule III, Part V of the Criminal P.C. in which the power to give sanction to the First Class Magistrate for tendering pardon is not included. From this, the learned Counsel for the petitioner points out that though the Additional District Magistrate was clothed with all the powers of the District Magistrate, by the State Government, as the power to grant sanction is not included in the schedule and that such power to sanction being a special power it cannot be said that such special power wag conferred on him.