STATE OF MYSORE Vs. KOTI POOJARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition presented by the State against an order made by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Puttur, discharging the two respondents under section 119 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in proceedings commenced under section 109(a)of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an order that the two respondents should be called upon to furnish security for good behaviour.

(2.) THE information which was furnished to the Magistrate by the Police was that on December 22, 1962 at 3 -30 a.m. the two respondents were found in the verandah of the shop of a certain Ethirajulu Chettiar by P.W. 1and 2 who were doing their beat work. The evidence given by P.Ws. 1 and 2 was that when they flashed their torch lights, the respondents concealed themselves behind the pillars of the verandah and that when those two constables came nearer, the respondents came out to the road and began to run but were chased by P.Ws. 1 and 2 and caught with the assistance of P.W. 3, a Gurkha watchman, who was coming in the opposite direction riding on a bicycle.

(3.) THE Magistrate was disposed to take the view that it was not established that the respondents had made themselves liable to furnish any security under section 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was of the view that the evidence given by P.Ws. 1 and 2 and P.W. 3, the Gurkha watchman, was by itself quite insufficient to found an order under its provisions. He further pointed out that a certain Ramakrishna Hegde who attested the mahazar under which articles were stated to have been recovered from the respondents, was not examined, and in the absence of his evidence it was not safe to rely upon the evidence of the other three witnesses.