STATE G S S I Vs. P RAMASWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Third Presidency Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras City, has made this reference to the High Court under Section 432 (2) Cr. P. C. for its decision on on his file. The facts that led to the reference are briefly the following:

(2.) ONE P. Ramaswami, accused in the case is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of a paper called "nathigam". In three issues of this paper an article under the caption "allavin Thandanayil Alangolam" was published and it is alleged that the above publication was made with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of the Muslims and that consequently the accused committed an offence under Section 295-A I. P. C. " In order to comply with the provisions in section 196 Cr. P. C. , which prescribes that a complaint made by the order of, or under authority from the State Government, is an essential prerequisite before a court can take cognizance of the offence under Section 295-A I. P. C. , the State government issued G. O. Ms. No. 2129 Home Department dated 23rd June 1961. This G. O. ordered that a complaint be made against the above said P. Ramaswami, in respect of the offence punishable under Section 295-A I. P. C. and directed the Commissioner of Police, Madras, to depute a suitable officer to make the complaint as aforesaid. On receipt of this G. O. , the Commissioner of Police, madras, issued certain proceedings dated 14th July 1961, which stated inter alia

(3.) AT this stage, the magistrate seems to have entertained certain doubts regarding the legality of the procedure followed up till then. He has referred to section 196b Crl. P. C. which states that in the case of any offence in respect of which the provisions of Section 196 will apply, a District Magistrate or a Chief presidency Magistrate may, notwithstanding anything contained in that section or in any other part of the Code, order a preliminary investigation by a police officer not being below the rank of inspector in which case such police officer shall have the powers referred to in Section 155 Sub-section (3) Crl. P. C. In view of this provision, the learned Magistrate entertained a doubt as to whether the investigation conducted by the Sub-Inspector, Ranjitham, on the direction of the commissioner of Police, was a valid one or not. The further doubt that he entertained was whether the complaint filed by Sub Inspector, on which he took cognizance of the offence, was a complaint within the meaning of Section 4 (1) (h)Crl. P. C. or a police report forwarded under Section 173 (1) (a) Crl. P. C. Arising out of these doubts, he has referred the following points of law to this Court for decision-