SANKARAN UNNI VASUDEVAN UNNI Vs. RASHEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant challenges an order of acquittal passed in S. T. No. 720 of 1976 instituted on a complaint filed by him and tried summarily by the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Karunagappally. The attack against the order of acquittal is on the ground that no judgment at all has been recorded by the Trial Court in the case and the mandatory provisions in S.264 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, hereinafter called the New Code, have been flagrantly violated. The learned advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that there has been no violation of S.264 of the New Code, and that in a summary trial the Magistrate is not bound to write a detailed judgment.

(2.) The counsel for the appellant applied for a certified copy of the judgment of the Trial Court and what was granted to him as judgment has now been produced in this court. Being not satisfied with what was granted, when the appellant again applied before the Trial Court, he was told that that was the only record in the case and his application was rejected. This is a case in which the accused did not plead guilty and keenly contested it. A number of witnesses were said to have been examined and cross examined.

(3.) It is true that in a summary trial the Presiding Officer is not bound to write a detailed judgment or a judgment in accordance with S.354 of the New Code and that it is enough if he gives a brief statement of the reasons for his finding. But that does not mean that the Presiding Officer can dispose of the case by a one line order or judgment.