(1.) TWO reports were lodged at the police station Sadar Bazar, Saharanpur, on the 27th of May 1952 and the 28th of May 1952, by Sri Durga Prasad Khosla, It is suggested that the reports were lodged with the connivance and collusion of Sri Bal -want Singh Vakil, Munshi Atma Kam and Ch. Wall Mohammad. Sri Durga Prasad Khosla mentioned certain facts in his reports and said On their basis that he apprehended a breach of peace on behalf of Dr. Jamuna Prasad and Sri Ghasita Singh. He wanted action to be taken against them. On the 30th of May 1952 the police submitted a challan against the two persons and proceedings were started against them under Section 107 Cr. P. C.
(2.) THE learned Sessions Judge accepted the preliminary objection so far as the offences under Sections 120B, 342 and 500 I. P. C. were concerned. He thought that the complaint in respect of those offences had not been filed by the Magistrate under Section 476 Cr. P. C. and his order in that respect was therefore not appealable under Section 476 -B of the Code. So far as the complaint in respect of the offence under Section 193 I. P. C. was concerned, the learned Sessions Judge accepted the contention of the appellants that it was not open in view of Section 479 -A of the Criminal Procedure Code to the learned Magistrate to file a complaint for that offence long after he had concluded the case under Section 107 Cr. P. C.
(3.) THESE two applications in revision came up for disposal before one of us and while the question raised by Dr. Jamuna Prasad and Sri Ghasita Singh in Criminal Revision No. 85 of 1957 was being considered learned counsel for the opposite party referred to the case of Jaibir Singh v. Mal -khan Singh, 1958 All LJ 256: (AIR 1958 All 364) and contended that the decision in the case concluded the matter and in view of it that application in revision was bound to fail.