FAKRUDDIN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE POLICE, NIRMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision petition has been referred to a Bench as the question whether an order of discharge purported to be under sub-section (2) of Section 251-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be revised by the Sessions Judge, and whether the Sessions Court can remand the case for "further enquiry" or there can only be a proceeding by way of a "re-trial".

(2.) The facts giving rise to the filing of the present revision petition are quite simple. Thirteen persons have been charge-sheeted by the Station House Officer, Nirmal Police Station, for offences under Section 382, Indian Penal Code. They are accused of committing theft of 10 bags of beedies belonging to Mupkal beedi factory at about 5-00 p.m., on 9-8-1960 after making preparation to cause hurt and wrongful restraint. Those beedi bags were being transported in a jeep car, which was stopped when it neared a jungle and the beedies were stolen by the accused.

(3.) It is necessary for us to have to deal with the merits of the case; for, the learned counsel for the petitioners contented with contending that the learned Sessions Judge had no power to interfere with the order of discharge falling under sub-section (2) of Section 251-A of the Criminal P.C