T C NICHODEMUS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused 1 in P. R. C. No. 1 of 1954 is the petitioner. A complaint was filed against him and eleven others for offences under Sections 343, 348 and 330, I. P. C.

(2.) The petitioner who is the Inspector of Police Srikakulam, in the course of an investigation into a series of cases of house breaking and theft questioned P. W. 1 on 27-10-1952 in the police station regarding one of such occurrences. When P. W. 1 denied knowledge of it, he directed the subordinate officials, who were there, to investigate further into the matter. In pursuance to these directions P. W. 1 was taken to a corner and, after, further questioning, they handcuffed him and chained him to the iron bar of the door. It is also the prosecution case that on the 28th October when the petitioner went to the police station and saw the plight of P. W. 1, he abused the constables for handcuffing him locking him up and directed that he should be released immediately. But this direction of the petitioner was not obeyed, and P. W. 1 continued in wrongful detention. Apparently the petitioner did not Know about this. It also appears that later on P. W. 1 was ill-treated by the other accused in the case. It is in these circumstances that a complaint for offences under Sections 348 and 330, I. P. C. was filed before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Srikakulam.

(3.) A preliminary point was raised that the complaint was barred under Section 53, Madras District Police Act, 1859. To appreciate this point, it is necessary to state that the alleged offence was committed on 6-11-1952 while the complaint was filed on 26-3-1953. Instead of deciding this point of limitation, the lower court stated that it was not free from difficulty and that a circular of this court and a decision of Ramaswami J. in --'Umanatha Rao v. State', precluded the Magistrate from giving his opinion on the point at that stage. The aggrieved first accused has filed this petition.