Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1929 DIGILAW 175 (MAD)

Secy. Of State v. Saminatha Nadar

1929-04-26

JACKSON

body1929
JUDGMENT Jackson, J. 1. The question for decision is whether certain documents items 1 and 7, are open to the lower Courts inspection. The point is concluded by Irwin v. D.J. Reid A.I.R. 1921 Cal 282 which follows the English Law, see Halsburys Laws of England, Vol. 11, pp. 84 and 137. 2. The public officer concerned and not the Judge is to decide whether the evidence referred to shall be given or withheld. If the objection is taken by the proper person, the Court will not go behind it. 3. The order directing the open production of the documents is cancelled. The petition is allowed with costs.