https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292801 The High Court's power of superintendence under Section 107 of the Government of India Act was distinct from appellate jurisdiction and could be used to keep inferior courts within lawful limits. It did not extend to correcting mere errors of fact or law, but intervention was proper where there was a jurisdictional defect or where the magistrate's own findings did not in law establish the offence. On the stated facts, conviction under Section 19(f) of the Arms Act was unsustainable because there was no evidence that the accused owned or controlled the revolver found in another person's pocket, and Section 34 IPC did not supply the missing legal basis for possession or control. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292801 The High Court's power of superintendence under Section 107 of the Government of India Act was distinct from appellate jurisdiction and could be used to keep inferior courts within lawful limits. It did not extend to correcting mere errors of fact or law, but intervention was proper where there was a jurisdictional defect or where the magistrate's own findings did not in law establish the offence. On the stated facts, conviction under Section 19(f) of the Arms Act was unsustainable because there was no evidence that the accused owned or controlled the revolver found in another person's pocket, and Section 34 IPC did not supply the missing legal basis for possession or control. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292801