IN RE CHIDRA LINGAMURTHY AND OTHERS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In P. R. C. No. 2 of 1962, the learned Principal Munsif-Magistrate of Warangal passed an order committing the three accused therein to the Sessions Court. Warangal for trial after framing, charges under Section 467 Indian Penal Code against A-1 to A-3 and under Sections 209, 471 and 193 Indian Penal Code against A-1. The three accused filed this revision petition for quashing the order of committal.

(2.) In the order of committal, it is mentioned that the committal is under Section 207-A(7) Criminal Procedure Code and. accordingly, the revision petition mentions that it is filed under Section 561-A Criminal Procedure Code. But, in fact, the committal inquiry was held on the basis of a complaint filed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Warangal and not on a police report. Therefore, in view of Section 207 Criminal Procedure Code the procedure which had to be followed was that indicated in Section 207(b) and Section 208 Criminal Procedure Code onwards. The committal must be deemed to have been made under Section 213 Criminal Procedure Code and not under Section 207-A(7). Consequently, the petition for quashing must be deemed to be under Section 215 Criminal Procedure Code which is the correct section applicable to this case. Under that Section, quashing can be done only on a point of law.

(3.) The relevant facts are as follows : A-1 filed O. S. No. 95 of 1960 on the file of the Munsif-Magistrate, Warangal. It was transferred to the Sub-Court, Warangal and tried by the learned Subordinate Judge as O. S. No. 38 of 1961. The suit was for recovery of money due under a promissory note dated 21-7-1957 purporting to have been executed by the sole defendant, Chinna Veerayya in favour of the sole plaintiff namely, A1, for Rs. 1,200/-. The learned Subordinate Judge after trial of the suit, pronounced judgment on 16-8-1961 dismissing the suit with costs. In the course of the judgment, he observed as follows :