D OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short hereinafter referred to as Code) by the petitioner-accused No.4.

(2.) Sri K. Vinaya Kumar, the learned counsel representing the petitioner would contend that the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Suryapet while considering Crl.M.P.Nos.3784 and 3785 of 2003 to recall P.Ws.1 and 2, arrived at a conclusion that in the light of the material available on record, L.W.10, the present petitioner to be shown as accused No.4 and for his appearance and for further proceedings, matter had been adjourned. The learned Counsel would also maintain that absolutely, there is no culpability on the part of the petitioner and the petitioner himself on 3-10-1998 addressed a letter to the Investigating Officer admitting his signatures on the application form and pleaded that out of confidence in Ch.Devaiah, Craft Teacher of the same school, who was looking after the work of filling up of applications, he had signed. The learned Magistrate, no doubt, recorded certain reasons and came to a conclusion that the petitioner also to be shown as A-4.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case well explained, inasmuch as the learned Magistrate has power under Section 319 of the Code and inasmuch as the learned Magistrate exercised the discretion properly, the said discretion need not be disturbed by this Court.