work on the Adjective Criminal Law of India. Should he find time to wield his swift and strong pen for writing a similar commentary on the Indian Penal Code he would immortalize his memory as a Criminal lawyer of high order. The Indian Statute Book-By C. Annadurai Aiyar, Vakil, Chingleput, Madras. Published by Messrs. Hoe and Co., Madras. In four Royal octavo volumes, 1905. Per set bound Rs. 20, or unbound, Rs. 18. This is another compilation by Mr. Aiyar. He has collected therein all the unrepealed Acts and Regulations of the GovernorGeneral in Council, passed from 1834 to the end of 1904, which are of general application throughout India. The Local and Special Acts have not found place in the collection. Only such Statutes as apply to every part of India have been reproduced. The four volumes comprise respectively the gen ral Statutory law of the following periods: Vol. I-from 1834-1876; Vol. II-from 18771884; Vol. III-from 1885-1997; Vol. IV-from 1898-1904. This chronological divi-ion of the Statutes appears on the title page but not on the back of each bound volume. We would suggest, however, that the back of each volume should show not only the number of the volume, as it does, but also the period the Acts of which the volume contains. The work is a very useful compilation, but had the learned compiler inserted the rules and notifications of the High Courts and Governments under each Art, the usefulness of the set would have been more than doubled. And had he followed the worthy example, of Mr. Whitely Stokes and added references to the case-law bearing on the sections of every Act, his edition of the Indian Statute Book would have proved a golden work. But to carry out these suggestions demands herculean labour and considerable time. In the present form also the set is a thesaurus of the general Statutory law of India, and its price, compared with its bulk and splendid get-ur, is only nominal. The Code of Criminal Procedure, Act V of 1898.-By G. S.. Henderson, M. A., Burrister at-law, one of the Judges of the High Court, Calcutta. Published by the " Weekly Note Printing Works, Calcutta " Seventh Edition, 1905; pp. 937 + X Cl. R. 20. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Henderson's Commentary on the Code of Criminal I'rocedure is a standard work of reference on the Adjective Criminal Law of India. India. The title The title page tells us that the book contains, inter alia, the Notifications and Orders of the Government of India and the Local Governments. But we are sadly disappointed to find that in some cases instead of setting out such Notification, &., at length, the learned commentator bas simply made references to the dates and pages of the Gazettes. and other compilations in which those Notifications have originally appeared. For instance, no rules have been inserted under S. 514, and mere references to other works have been considered sufficient. We would, however, say that in a commentary it is always better to err more on the sile of inclusion than on the side of exclusion. We regret to notice further that the addition, in Schedule I of the Code, relating to Sections 483 A, 489 B, 489 (C and 489 D of the iniian Penal Code, made by s. 3 of Act XII of 1899, have not been incorporated. This is a very serious omission in the present as well as the last elitions of the book. The notes have been divided into appropriate headings printed in antique type to catch the eye. And we are glad to say that they are very full. The Punjab Chief Court Cases have been digested to enhance the usefulness of the work in the Punjab. But the Burma Chief Court cases have not been cited at all. In a commentary on the Code of general application throughout India, the commentator should always endeavour to incorporate, if possible, the decision of all the High Courts in the empire. In other words, the commentary should be as general as the Cole itself. The bulk of the book has considerably increased. And perhaps the next edition shall have to be split up in two handy volumes. Mr. Justice Henderson's commentary has been in the field for a long time and it is too well known to stand in need of any introduction or praise from us. It is one of the best annotated editions of the Code, and contains up-to-date Case-Law. The present edition is a decided improvement on the sixth edition in asmuch as the notes oa several sections have been entirely re-written. THE OF INDIA. Journal Nos. 10, 11 and 12] OCT., NOV. and DEC., 1905. (By K. S. Venketramier, B. A.) COMMISSIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES. EXAMINATION OF Pardanashin LADIES. [Vol. 2 THE issue of commissions for the examination of witnesses by Criminal Courts and the procedure to be followed in the execution of such commissions are dealt with in Sections 503 to 507 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 503 of the Code is the only section which provides for all the cases in which the Legislature intended that it should be competent to particular classes of Criminal Courts to issue a commission. The section runs thus: "503. (1) Whenever, in the course of an inquiry, a trial or any other proceeding under this Code, it appears to a Presidency Magistrate, a District Magistrate, a Court of Session or the High Court that the examination of a witness is necessary for the ends of justice, and that the attendance of such witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, would be unreasonable, such Magistrate or Court may dispense with such attendance and may issue a commission to any District Magistrate or Magistrate of the first class, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such witness resides, to take the evidence of such witness. "(2) When the witness resides in the territories of any Prince or Chief in India in which there is an officer representing the British Indian Government, the Commission may be issued to such officer. (3) The Magistrate or officer to whom the Commission is issued, or, if he is the District Magistrate, he or such Magistrate of the first class, as he appoints in his behalf, shall proceed to the place where the witness is, or shall summon the witness before him, and shall take down his evidence in the same manner and may for this purpose exercise the same powers as in trials of warrant cases under this Code. "(4) Where the Commission is issued to such officer as is mentioned in sub-section (2), he may delegate his powers and duties under the Commission to any officer subordinate to hir whose powers are not less than those of a Magistrate of the first class in British India." The only reasons that justify exemption from personal at tendance are "delay, expense or inconvenience which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable." The words in the last portion of the first paragraph of the section indicate that the witnesses to be examined on Commission do not reside within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Judge who issues the Commission. The words "delay, expense," indicate that the witnesses to be examined reside at a distance and not within the jurisdiction of the Court. The word "inconvenience" probably applies to cases of illness, old age and other similar inconveniences. The section itself applies to witnesses of either sex. The cases of pardanashin ladies, i.e., ladies who, according to the customs and manners of the country, do not appear in public have been held in some cases to be covered by the word "inconvenience." It is, however, observed that no useful purpose is served by the issue of a Commission to another Magistrate of the first class or District Magistrate; for if a lady has a sentimental objection to appear in Court before the trying Magistrate, how is that objection met with if she has to appear in Court before a Magistrate to whom a Cmmission is issued ? It has been held in a recent case (Veerabadran Chetty v. Nataraja Desikar, I. L. R., 28, Madras 28) in which the question of the issue of a Commission arose under the Civil Procedure Code, that the question was one to be entirely dealt with under the provisions of the Code, and that Section 386 of the Civil Procedure Code was exhaustive. Applying the same principle, Section 503 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be held to be exhaustive. The Civil Procedure Code provides in various sections for (1) the examination on Commission of (a) persons resident within the jurisdiction of the Court (e) persons residing outside British India mentionel in (2) the issue of a Commission to any person whom the Court thinks fit to execute the same under Section 385 of the Civil Procedure Code. In the absence of similiar provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure, it must be held that the Legislature intentionally omitted to provide for such cases in inquires and trials in Crimin. al cases. We have, therefore, to look to the case-law for any decisions on the subject. The earliest case on the point is-(IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF Hurro Soondery Chowdhrain, I. L. R., 4, Cal. 20). The Calcutta High Court, to whom the petitioner appealed against the order of the Magistrate of Mymensingh, who directed her personal attendance in Court, ordered the examination of the petitioner-a pardanashin lady-on Commission. The next case is (The Empress v. R. P. Counsell, I. L. R., 8, Cal. 896). The applicant in this case claimed exemption on the ground of illness and not on the ground of her being a pardanashin lady. It was contended by the opposing party that Section 76 of the High Court's Criminal Procedure Act (X of 1875) had no application, as it did not provide for "inconvenience" to a witness who was summoned to attend. Mr. Justice Wilson refused the application, remarking that the issue of a Commission would be a most unsatisfactory course of proceeding, and one dangerous to the interests of the prisoner. The question again came up for decision before Mr. Justice Straight in (IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF Farid-un-nissa, I. L. R., 5, |