ZIAULLAH AND ANR. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ZIA Ullah and Jumman have filed this revision against the appellate judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge of Basti upholding their conviction and sentences of fine of Rs. 25/ - , in default two months' R.I. each Under Section 353/34 IPC and Zia Ullah's further conviction and sentence of fine of Rs. 25/ - , in default two months' R.I. Under Section 379 IPC.

(2.) IT is unnecessary to set out the facts giving rise to this revision at any length, as it is likely to succeed on a short legal point to be indicated presently. It appears that on the F.I.R. of Ram Murat Misra, constable, a case Under Section 353/34 was registered against the Applicants and a further case Under Section 379 was registered against Ziaullah. Thereafter Zia Ullah made an application in court giving his version of the incident. The court preferred Zia Ullah's application to the police and, in due course, D.W.A.A. Khan, C.O. II made an enquiry on that application, and, being of the opinion that no case was made out Under Section 353 IPC he submitted a final report. Thereafter D.W.J.A. Lari, C.I. was asked to investigate the case and after conducting the enquiry he also submitted a final report. The learned Magistrate, however, did not agree with the conclusions of the police officers and he summoned the Applicants under the sections mentioned above, and after recording the evidence of the parties he found both the offences made out against the Applicants. He therefore convicted and sentenced them under both the counts. Thereupon the Applicants preferred a revision in the lower revisional court which was, however, dismissed. Hence this revision.

(3.) NOW Under Section 190 Code of Criminal Procedure a Magistrate may take cognizance of any offence: