PUBLIC PROSECUTOR A P Vs. PANNALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE several cases indicate how the anxiety for disposal for statistical purposes has led a Magistrate to misuse the provisions of Section 247 Cr. P. C. The provisions of Section 247 Cr. P. C. have been converted into a jok . Criminal Prosecutions are meant to bring offenders to justice and are launched in the interests of the public justice. That is why the vast majority of prosecutions in our country are launched by the State. A tew prosecutions are permitted to be launched by private individuals Even there it is the public interest that is important. Therefore wherever a complainant is absent and a situation arises in which the discretion given to the Magistrate under Section 247 Cr. P. C. has to be exercised, the Magistrate should address himself to the question how the cause of public justice would be best served and not straightway acquit the accused on the ground of the absence of the complainant. There must of course be no undue harassment to the accused, but there must ba no hasty dismissal of a complaint either. Where an accused has been attending court for several hearings but the complainant has been absenting himself continuously, it will be a sound exercise of discretion on the part of the Magistrate to acquit the accused to prevent harassment to the accused. On the other hand, wben the accused has not even been served with summons, it will be a sound exercise of discretion to adjourn the bearing.

(2.) THE facts in all those appeals are identical. THE Assistant Inspector of Labour of Kothagudern filed separate complaints against several persons on 24-6-58 for contraventions of the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act and the Minimum Wages Rule.s. THE learned Magistrate took the cases on file on 5-7-68 and posted the cases to 9-7-68. He also directed summons to be issued, Summons were actually issued on 8-7-68 and were served on the accused on 11-7-58 and on subsequent dates. Meanwhile the cases were called on 9-7-68 and on the ground that the complainant was absent the Magistrate acquitted the accused in all the cases. I have no hesitation to hold that the learned Magistrate acted with haste and exercised his discretion wrongly in acquitting the accused in these cases. THE Complaints had been filed, not two weeks earlier; the accused had not been served with summons and the date on which the orders of acquittal were made was the first date of hearing. All the orders of acquittal are set aside, and the learned Magistrate is directed to take the complaints on file and dispose them of in accordance with the law, THE appeals are allowed accordingly.