ISHAN CHANDRA BHUTT Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This was a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the appeal should not be reheard on the ground that a mukhtear has a right to appear for the defence of an accused person in any mofussil Court.

(2.) The issue of this Rule appears to have raised a general question between vakils and pleaders and mukhtears as to the right of the latter to appear in criminal cases. It was never intended that such a question should be raised, and the question is obviously one which has been disposed of by the terms of the law and by the High Court Rules. The law is contained in Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code read with Section 4, Clause (r) of the same Code. Every person accused before any Criminal Court may of right be defended by a pleader, and "pleader" in this connection includes any mukhtear or other person appointed with the permission of the Court to act in such proceeding.

(3.) This particular practitioner has a 15-rupee license entitling him to practise as a mukhtear in all Civil and Criminal Courts subordinate to the High Court, except the Calcutta Small Cause Court. It is, therefore, clear that, subject to the permission of the Criminal Courts in each case, (and this applies equally to the Sessions Judge and the Magistrate) he is authorised to practise.