DULARI KOERI Vs. FAUZDAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the Sub-ordinate Judge of Darbhanga has decided an appeal under Section 476-B, Criminal P.C., which was transferred to him for hearing by the District Judge. It is pointed out on behalf of the petitioner that the Court of the District Judge is the only Court to which that of the Munsif is subordinate within;he meaning of Sub-section (3), Section 195, Criminal P.C., so that the appeal under Section 476-B could be heard only by he District Judge himself.

(2.) Mr. Janak Kishore suggests that a different rule is laid down in Ram Chandra V/s. Emperor AIR 1929 Pat 367 but in that case the Subordinate Judge had been especially empowered to entertain appeals from the Munsif of Sambalpur.

(3.) Similarly in Dinanath V/s. Muhammad Abdulla AIR 1921 Lah 28 the appeal was held to lie to the Subordinate Judge because a notification had been issued directing that certain appeals from the decision of the Munsif should be preferred to the Subordinate Judge. It is not suggested here that there has been any such notification.