KALLI BHASKARAN Vs. KALLI DAMODARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision case is directed by the complainant in a private complaint case against an order passed by the Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mahe, in P. R. C. No. 3 of 1990 on his file.

(2.) THE complaint was taken on file for an offence under sec. 436 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After recording the sworn statement of the complainant as the case appeared to be one triable by a court of session, the complainant was directed to produce all his witnesses and the complainant examined P. Ws. 1 to 5 and there were two witnesses more cited in the complaint.

(3.) A reading of Sec. 209, Crl. P. C. would clearly show that when after the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate it appears to the Magistrate that the case is triable exclusively by a Court of session, he shall then commit the case to the Court of Sessions. In our case after the accused appeared it appeared to the Magistrate that the case is not one triable exclusively by the Court of. Session but it is triable by a magistrate and therefore he has ordered as aforesaid. Thus I find no illegality committed by the learned Magistrate.