SUDIR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted.

(2.) A grey area is sought to be replenished with a judicial pronouncement. A case and counter case, both were committed to the court of Sessions as both cases involve offences triable exclusively by sessions Court. But after hearing the preliminary arguments the Sessions Judge felt that in one case no offence triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions is involved, whereas in the other case a charge for offences including one triable exclusively by the Sessions Court could be framed. Is it necessary, in such a situation, that the Sessions Court should transfer the former case to the Chief judicial Magistrate for trial as envisaged in S. 228 (1) of the Code of Criminal procedure (for short'the Code')? This is the core issue which has come up to the fore in these appeals.

(3.) IN the Sessions Court the first case was taken up under S. 227 of the Code and the Court framed charge against the accused for offences under S. 307 read with Ss. 149,147 and 427 IPC. When the preliminary arguments in the second case were heard under S. 227 of the Code, the Sessions judge found that no offence triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions need be included in the charge and hence he framed a change as envisaged in S. 228 (1) (a) of the Code for the offence under S. 324 read with S. 149 and certain other counts of the INdian Penal Code. Thereafter he transferred the second case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate as provided in S. 228 (1) of the Code.