NADAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Revision No. 26 of 1964 has been filed by Nankoo against an order dated 26.4.1963 of the S.D.M., Kaimganj, District Farrukhabad, which he purported to act under Sec. 112, Crimial P.C. The order is to the following effect:-

(2.) The provisions of Sec. 112 are mandatory and have to be strictly complied with. In the present case the Magistrate does not appear to have applied his mind to the provisions of Sec. 112. He made an order which did not comply with the terms of the Section. The learned Civil and Sessions Judge before whom the revision was filed by the applicants conceded that the order made by the Magistrate was illegal. He, however, got over the difficulty by observing that the summons issued to the applicant under Sec. 115 of the Code contained all the particulars referred to in Sec. 112. In the very nature of things Sec. 115 comes into operation after a valid and proper order has been made by the Magistrate in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 112. If no such order exists there is no jurisdiction to issue a notice in terms of Sec. 115. In my opinion, the learned Civil and Sessions Judge was in error in ignoring the mandatory provisions of Sec. 112.

(3.) It is a well established principle of law that if an act is required to be done in a particular manner it has to be done in that manner or not at all. The fact that a duty has been cast under Sec. 112 on the Magistrate taking proceedings under Sec. 107 to act in the manner prescribed under Sec. 112 makes it obligatory on him to follow the mandate of the law.