KISHORI JHA Vs. ANAND KISHORE JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate's proceedings were irregular from the outset.

(2.) We have not got the order of 19th December 1927 which is referred to in his order dated 17th January 1928. Section 144, Criminal P.C. provides that in certain contingencies the Magistrate may direct a person not to do any act which causes obstruction, annoyance or injury or risk of obstruction to any person lawfully employed or a, disturbance of the public tranquillity. The Magistrate may make this order ox parte or he may make it after issuing notice to the person concerned and hoar in the cause shown by him. But sometimes a Magistrate makes the order straightway ex parte and at, the same time orders the party affected to show cause. This does not seem to be quite regular because Clause (4), Section 144, provides that the party affected may show cause after the order has been made and then the Magistrate may either rescind the order or modify it.

(3.) However, in the present case it would seem from the order of 17th January 1928, that an order absolute was made ex parte in the first instance against the opposite party and therefore the two months' time provided by Section 144 runs from 19th December and the order has spent itself.