KUMBHAR RAMJI JADAV Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this criminal revision application it is urged that the learned Magistrate who tried the case summarily rightly adopted the warrant procedure but it is contended that he did not follow all the requirements of the warrant procedure in particular the requirements contained in secs. 254 and 256 Criminal Procedure Code. Section 254 Cr.P.C. relates to the framing of charge when offence appears to have been proved In this case it is urged that no charge has been framed. But this is a simple case of the charge under sec. 323 I.P. Code and in view of sec. 537 Cri. Pro. Code I hold that no prejudice has been caused to the applicant when there has been failure of justice. Moreover the Rojkam says that the charge was framed and read over and explained to the accused.

(2.) As regards the requirements of sec. 256 Cri. P. C. sec. 256(1) of the said section reads as follows :

(3.) A question was put to each of the accused persons whether he wanted to recall the prosecution witnesses or whether he wanted to examine them for further cross-examination and the answer given by accused No. 1 was `yes. The accused gave the application Ex. 6 which reads as follows: