MEDANKI ADEYYA AND ORS. Vs. DITTAKAVI APPARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the personal grounds against the Magistrate put forward by the petitioners in support of their application for transfer have been categorically and convincingly denied by the Magistrate and need no further consideration. The learned Advocate for the petitioners presses for the transfer on two grounds. The first is that the Magistrate posted the counter case, C. C. No. 465 of 1955 in which petitioner 1 is the complainant, for arguments to 28 -8 -1955, which was a Sunday. He refers to Rule 1 of the Criminal Rules of Practice which reads:

(2.) THE other ground urged is that the Magistrate refused an adjournment, when petitioner 1 on behalf of all the petitioners presented an application to him under Section 526 (8), Criminal P.C. on 28 -8 -1955. The reason given by the Magistrate is that he followed an observation in - Rex v. : AIR1950All312 at p. 314 (A) according to which "the words 'at any stage before the defence closes its case', do not mean 'at any stage before the arguments begin' but have reference to the stage when the defence evidence has been concluded."