RAM NATH Vs. MANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two connected revision applications, one being under the Code of Criminal procedure and the other under Article 227 of the Constitution, directed against the order of Mr. K. Ray, Extra Magistrate, Barabanki, holding that he had no jurisdiction to proceed with the case and directing that it be sent to the Pancha-yati Adalat of Narauli for disposal.

(2.) THE facts which gave rise to these applications are that Ram Nath, against whom the opposite parties are stated to have a long-standing grievance with regard to a grove, was waylaid at about 11-00 a. m. in the fields of his village while proceeding to Razaganj Bazar and beaten with lathis. Two grievous injuries were caused, one of them being fracture of the little finger of the left hand and the other being a similar fracture of the index finger of the right hand. Altogether Ram Nath received 10 injuries and he was examined by the Medical Officer in charge of the dispensary at rudauli on the same day. He was taken on a cot to police station Bhelsar where he lodged the first information report at 6. 05 p. m. naming the two opposite parties as his assailants.

(3.) EVIDENCE on behalf of the prosecution was recorded and a charge was framed under Section 325, I P. C. Thereafter the prosecution witnesses were again cross-examined and some formal witness were produced. The accused also produced three witnesses in defence. Arguments were heard and eventually the learned Magistrate passed a very short order in which he held that there was no convincing proof as to which of the two accused persons was responsible for causing grievous hurt to the complainant. He also found that there was no sufficient ground for holding that the two accused persons had a common intention of causing grievous hurt. On these findings the learned Magistrate was bound under Section 56, U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, to transfer the case to the Panchayati Adalat since his findings led to the conclusion that neither of the two persons could be convicted under Section 325 but that any offence that may have been made out was one under Section 323, I. P. C.