Letters Patent intra-court appeal barred in writ proceedings quashing criminal action because subject-matter was criminal in nature.

Under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, maintainability of an intra-court appeal depends on the nature of the jurisdiction exercised and the subject-matter of the proceeding. An order passed under Article 226 quashing criminal proceedings was treated as falling within criminal jurisdiction for this purpose, so the writ appeals were barred despite the writ forum. The court applied the settled principle that the criminal character of the underlying subject-matter governs maintainability, and the challenge to the Single Judge's order failed at the threshold.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ appeals were maintainable against the order of the Single Judge passed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing criminal proceedings.

Analysis: The appeal turned on the principle that the nature of the jurisdiction exercised and the subject-matter of the proceeding govern maintainability under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The order under challenge arose from a writ petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings, which falls within the field of criminal jurisdiction for the purpose of the bar on intra-court appeal. The Court applied the settled position that an order passed in such criminal matters under Article 226 is not immune from the maintainability bar merely because it was rendered in writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ appeals were not maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Single Judge's order failed at the threshold and the appeals stood dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, an order passed in a proceeding seeking quashing of criminal action under Article 226 is governed by the criminal nature of the subject-matter, and an intra-court appeal is barred where the appeal lies against such criminal jurisdiction.

---