GANDI PUDAPU NAIDU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter has been referred to a Division Bench by Krishna Rao, J., as he felt there is a conflict of views between two learned single Judges of this Court with regard to the powers of an Additional Session Judge-cum-Additional District Magistrate to transfer cases from one Magistrate to another-which is the very question involved in these two connected Criminal Revision Cases. We will first decide this matter by reference to the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and then try to resolve the conflict, if any.

(2.) The facts giving rise to these revision cases are as follows :- On the 25th November, 1958, one Kilaparthi Sanyasi, filed a complaint before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Salur, against Gandi Pudipu Naidu and 24 others for offences under sections 395, 149 and 324, Indian Penal Code, alleging that the 25 persons had, by use offeree, carried away a large quantity of grain belonging to him. The Magistrate took the case on file as P.R.C.No. 6 of 1958, recorded the sworn statement of the complainant but before proceeding further, chose to act under section 202, Criminal Procedure Code and directed the Circle Inspector of Police, Bobbili, to investigate into the allegations in the complaint and submit his report. Accordingly, the Circle Inspector of Police conducted an investigation and sent his report on the 30th January, 1959, to the effect that it was a false case in that the com plainant had magnified a trivial incident arising out of the impounding of cattle into a serious case of dacoity.

(3.) About a month prior to the filing of the complaint referred to above, on a report given to the Station House Officer, Gajapathinagaram, about the same occurrence, against the same accused and in respect of the same offences, a case had been registered on the 25th October, 1958, as Crime No. 196 of 1958 and after a thorough investigation, the Station House Officer submitted his final report under section 173, Criminal Procedure Code, to the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Salur, stating that the case was a false one. The Magistrate accepted the report and passed a final order thereon treating the case as false. This order was passed after the records in P.R.C. No. 6 of 1958 had been sent by the Magistrate to the Circle Inspector of Police, Bobbili, for investigation under section 202, Criminal Procedure Code and before the report of the Circle Inspector was received. Consequently, when on the 3Oth January, 1959, the Magistrate received the report submitted by the Circle Inspector, he found himself in an embarrassing situation as he had already formed an opinion about the case by passing a final order under section 173, Criminal Procedure Code on the report sent by the Station House Officer. Since he could not proceed further with P.R.C. No. 6 of 1958, the Magistrate addressed a communication on 9th February, 1959, to the Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, apprising him of the situation and requesting him to transfer the case to any other Magistrate.