RAM SWAROOP HIMMAT SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Bhagwati Narayan, Commerical Manager, Rampur Distillery and Chemical Co. Ltd., Rampur, filed two complaints under Section 409, I.P.C. against the applicant on the assertion that the applicant was appointed as an agent of the said company in 1057 for sale of rectified and denatured spirit supplied by the Company in the whole of Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal on the condition that he would be paid commission for the same on realization of the price from the customers, An allegation was made in the complaints that goods of the value of about Rs. two lacs were sold through the accused, that he realised price of the same from the customers, that he handed over cheques to the tune of Rs. 44,024.59 nP. to the complainant on account of the price of the goods sold through him, that the aforesaid cheques were not honoured and that the applicant had misappropriated that amount. The learned Magistrate before whom the complaints were filed took cognizance of the case and summoned the accused. The complainant had filed a list of nine other witnesses besides himself and they were summoned by the Magistrate for evidence.

(2.) The complainant was examined under Section 252, Cri.P.C. on 29.6.1963 and was cross-examined partly on 24.8.1963 and 11.9.1963 was fixed as the date for his further cross-examination. On that date as the accused and his counsel were both absent the learned Magistrate discharged the witnesses and fixed 23.9.1963 for the statement of the accused and for framing of the charge. On 23.9.1963 he recorded the statement of the accused and on 30.9.1963 passed an order for his discharge. The complainant went up in revision before the learned Additional District Magistrate, Rampur, who was of the view that the Magistrate "was bound to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution", and as he has failed to do so the order of discharge was improper. He, therefore, allowed the revision, set aside the order or discharge and sent back the case to the Judicial Officer No. II for further inquiry into the complaint.

(3.) Against the aforesaid order of the Additional District Magistrate the accused has come up in revision before this Court.