STATE Vs. ABOOBAKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the State against the order of acquittal of the respondent who was the 1st accused in C. C. 2/59 on the file of the District Magistrate (Judicial), Quilon. There were originally two accused in the case. They were charge sheeted by the Karunagappally police for offences under S.454, 452, 323, 506 (2) and 109, I.P.C. The second accused in the case being a juvenile the case was transferred to the file of the District Magistrate, Quilon on 3-6-59.

(2.) On that day the accused were questioned and charges were framed to which they pleaded not guilty. The case was then adjourned to 15-6-59 and summons was directed to be Issued to the witnesses numbers 1 to 10 shown in the charge sheet. On 15-6-59 witnesses 1 to 9 though served with summons did not attend court. Bailable warrants were therefore issued returnable by 22-6-59. The investigating officer also did not attend the court as he was pre-occupied with important duties in connection with the political agitation which was then in existence in the State. On 22-6-59 again

(3.) The State has therefore come up in appeal against the order of acquittal of the 1st accused Later a petition was filed to implead the second accused also, but at the time of argument the petition was not pressed by the learned Public Prosecutor. Our learned brother Raman Nayar, J., before whom this appeal came up originally for hearing referred the case to a Division Bench. The question that is referred is whether the production of evidence in support of the prosecution under sub-section 7 of S.251 A is not something which the Magistrate trying the case has the power and the duty to secure.