STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. ABDUL RAHIMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has filed these revision petitions, challenging the common order d] .16-4-1975, passed by the Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in SC.Nos.30 to 36 of 1974, quashing the order of commitment dj .19-6-1974, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhadravathi, in CC.Nos.73, 202, 203 204, 205, 206 and 552 of 1973, under S.209 of the CrlPC, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'New Code), and directing that the record should be sent back to the Magistrate and the Magistrate should proceed to dispose of the cases, according to law.

(2.) The offences for which the respondents were committed are under Sections 120B, 467, 468, 420 and 471 IPC. Though the charge sheets had been filed in the year 1972, the committal inquiries were pending in the Court of the JMFC, Bhadravathi, even as on 1-4-1974, the date on which the new Code came into force. According to Sch.II of the CrlPC, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as the 'old Code') an offence punishable under S.467 IPC was exclusively triable by a Court of Session. As such in view of the facts and circumstances of this case offence under S.471 IPC, was also exclusively triable by the Court of Session. In view of the proviso to S.484(2) (a) of the new Code, the Magistrate applied S.209 of the new Code and passed the order of commitment in question. He, in this connection, reasoned that the offences under Ss.467 and 471 IPC were exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, as per the provisions of the old Code and that was not changed by the proviso to S.484(2) (a) of the new Code, but, what had been changed was only the procedure applicable to committal inquiries. He therefore concluded that the two offences being exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the cases were to be committed to the Court of Session. The learned Sessions Judge has found fault with this reasoning of the Magistrate. He has, by the order in question, held that in view of the proviso to S.484(2) (a) of the new Code, S.209 of the new Code became applicable to the inquiries before the Magistrate and as under Sch.I of the new Code, offences under Ss.467 and 471 IPC are not exclusively triable by the Sessions Court the Magistrate ought not to have committed the cases to the Court of Session. It is, on this basis, that the Sessions Judge has quashed the order of comittal and directed the trial of the cases by the Magistrate; himself.

(3.) Shri A.B.Patil, learned Govt Pleader urged that the proviso to S.484, (2) (a) of the new Code when read with 3.484(2) (a), would mean that only the cumbrous procedure of making a detailed inquiry as contemplated under S.207(a) of the old Code is done away. He urged that the proviso, has no effect of interference, with the powers of the Courts as enumerated in Schedule II of the old" Code. Relevant portion of S.484 of the new Code reads as follows :