TMI Blog1914 (3) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sely the same infirmity if the Income-tax Collector is a Court within the meaning of cls. (6) and (c) of Section 195. On this matter, i.e., whether an Income-tax Collector is such a Court there is a certain amount of authority which, in the main, favours the view that he is a Court. But a Bench of this Court decided in 1906 that an Income-tax Collector is not a Court within the meaning of Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code: In re Kalidas . If he is not a Court within the meaning or that section it is at least to me difficult, inspite of the definition of Court in Section 195, to suppose that he can be a Court within the meaning of the latter section for the purpose of the two sections is very much the same and their connection is intimate. 2. In a very much later case (In re Nanchand (1912) 15 Bom. L.R. 45) another Bench of this Court decided that a District Judge determining the validity of elections under Section 22 of the District Municipalities Act (Bombay Act III of 1901) is a Court within the meaning of Clause (b) of Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The reasoning, Mr. Justice Batchelor's judgment in that case is, it seems to me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complaint may be regarded as a complaint of the kind provided for in Clause (a) of Section 195. But that clause provides that the public servant concerned may either give a sanction or make a complaint and that seems to me to exclude the idea that a public servant may make a complaint by any form of delegation. It seems to me that he must make the complaint, if he wishes to take that course, personally. If he does not wish to take that course personally, the delegation is obtained by giving the sanction. Similarly the Collector as superior officer, though personally no doubt he might make the complaint, cannot delegate the making of a complaint to another. So I do not think that the proceedings in this case can be supported by that argument. 5. If the decision of the Full Bench is that an Income-tax Collector is a Court then I think the whole of those proceedings must be set aside. Shah, J. 6. I concur. This is an application to quash the proceedings arising out of a complaint lodged by Mr. T.P. Lakhia, the Resident First Class Magistrate of Nadiad, on the 10th October 1913. The complaint purports to have been made with the sanction of the Income-tax Collector dated 23r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule requiring a sanction or a complaint of the Court concerned in respect of certain offences is in favour of the view that the Income-tax Collector is a Court. In a recent case the Madras High Court has held that the Income-tax Collector is a Court : see In re Nataraja Iyer (1912) I.L.R. 36 Mad. 72. Having regard to the conflicting decisions, as well as to the-practical importance of the point, I think that the question formulated by my learned colleague should be referred to a Full Bench for decision. 8. The reference was heard by a Full Bench consisting of Scott C.J. and Batchelor and Beaman JJ., on the 23rd March 1914. 9. Velinkar, with Ratanlal Ranchhoddas, instructed by Soonderdass Co., for the applicant. 10. S.S. Patkar, Government Pleader, for the Crown. 11. Velinkar.-In the present case, the sanction in question was granted on the 23rd July 1912. The complaint, on the strength of that sanction, was lodged on the 20th October 1913. The sanction has therefore spent itself by lapse of six months under Section 195, Clause 6, of the Criminal Procedure Code. 12. The Income-tax Collector, under Act II of 1886, performs the functions of a Court: see Sections 3(9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28 of the Indian Penal Code. It cannot make the Income-tax Collector a Court: see the Queen- v. Assessment Committee of Saint Mary Abbotts, Kensington (1891) 1 Q.B. 378. Cur. adv. vult. Basil Scott, Kt., C.J. 21. The question referred for decision is whether an Income-tax Collector is or is not a 'Court' within the meaning of that word as used in Clauses (b) and (c) of Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code? 22. The word Court is defined in the section by a limited and exclusive definition to mean a Civil, Revenue or Criminal Court. It cannot be contended that the Income-tax Collector is a Civil or Criminal Court and therefore the only question is whether he at any time in the discharge of his functions under Act II of 1886 is a Revenue Court. 23. The term Revenue Court is not in genera but it has been used occasionally by local legislatures in this country in connection with the decision of questions relating to revenue by officers specially and exclusively empowered to decide them. See, for example, the City of Bombay Revenue Act and the Revenue Codes of Oudh, the United Provinces and the Punjab (U.P. Act II of 1901, Sections 59-62; U.P. Act III o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
