STATE OF U P Vs. RAM SEVAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I am afraid this appeal will have to be allowed. The Magistrate Mr. M. C. Singh has assumed in himself the powers which are at once arbitrary and against law.

(2.) THE respondents were prosecuted by the Station Officer Police Station Bithoor. Kanpur, under Sections 147, 148 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The offence was tried as a warrant case to which the procedure prescribed under Section 251-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was applicable. On 10th January, 1965 the Magistrate recorded the statement of the accused and framed charges against them under Sections 147 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The charges were read over to the accused and they pleaded not guilty.

(3.) ON 27th August, 1964, which was the date fixed for the hearing of the case, the prosecution examined two witnesses, Kalka and Bageshwar. Thereafter the Magistrate somehow formed an opinion that the prosecution case was false and without recording the rest of the evidence or examining the accused under Section 342 of the Code proceeded to write the judgment by which the accused were acquitted and against which this appeal has been filed by the Government. It is surprising that the Magistrate did not have regard to the provisions of Section 251-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and invented a short cut of his own for the disposal of the case before him.