PANGUNNY Vs. CHITAMBARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is prosecution witness number 1 in c. C. 1152/60 on the file of the Sub Magistrate, Chittur and respondents 1 to 4 are the accused in the case.

(2.) THE petitioner's case is that he was beaten with spade handles and bamboo sticks resulting in injuries. He preferred a complaint to the Kollengode Police and the police after investigation charge-sheeted the respondents for offences punishable under S. 323 & 325 read with S. 34 IPC. On a perusal of the relevant records the Sub Magistrate framed charges under s. 325. After the examination of the petitioner and the medical officer he made a report to the District Magistrate that as he was of the view that offences under S. 506 (2) and 326 of the IPC. were made out, the case may be transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction. THE learned district Magistrate after going through the evidence and seeing the instruments alleged to have been used by the accused, found that the Sub Magistrate's view that offences under S. 506 (2) and 326 were revealed, was wrong and ordered the magistrate to proceed with the trial of the case. That order was taken in revision before the Sessions judge with the prayer that the case may either be transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction or if the Sessions Judge was of the view that he had no jurisdiction to interfere to make a reference to the High Court under S. 435 & 436 Criminal Procedure Code. THE learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition finding that he had no jurisdiction to direct the Magistrate to frame charges for the graver offences if any since the trial had already commenced. As the learned judge did not find any incorrectness, impropriety or illegality in the proceedings of the lower court, the prayer to refer the case to the High court was also rejected. THE order of the Sessions Judge was taken in revision to this court and this court refused to interfere with the order and rejected the petition. Subsequently, the trial of the case was proceeded with and it ended in the acquittal of the accused. THE present revision is against the order of acquittal.

(3.) THE order of acquittal is therefore confirmed and this revision petition is dismissed. Dismissed.