https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192594 Execution of an extradition warrant by a District Magistrate was treated as an executive function, so it was not amenable to revisional interference under the Criminal Procedure Code. The warrant was also invalid because the statutory preconditions for extradition jurisdiction were not shown: the offence had to be an extradition offence, the accused could not be a European British subject, and the offence had to be committed or supposed to have been committed within the State territories. On the material before the Court, that territorial basis was lacking, so the arrest could not be sustained and relief against illegal detention remained available. en-us Thu, 26 Oct 1933 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192594 Execution of an extradition warrant by a District Magistrate was treated as an executive function, so it was not amenable to revisional interference under the Criminal Procedure Code. The warrant was also invalid because the statutory preconditions for extradition jurisdiction were not shown: the offence had to be an extradition offence, the accused could not be a European British subject, and the offence had to be committed or supposed to have been committed within the State territories. On the material before the Court, that territorial basis was lacking, so the arrest could not be sustained and relief against illegal detention remained available. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 26 Oct 1933 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192594