RATNAKAR DAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision arises out of G. R. Case No. 595 of 1963. It has a chequered career. Information to the police was given by the complainant on 28-3-63 about an occurrence of 27-3-63 at about 11 P. M. Police submitted a final report. On a protest being filed by the complainant, charge sheet under Sections 147/323 I. P. C. was called for against all the accused. The trial proceeded. On 4-3-64 Sri V. S. Rao, Magistrate, 1st Class, acquitted all the accused holding that the trial was illegal and without jurisdiction. The police did not challenge this order. In Cr. Rev. 167 of 1964 filed by the complainant, this order was quashed and the learned magistrate was directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law. Though a Prosecuting Inspector is in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate has permitted an advocate of the complainant to conduct the case. In fact the main responsibility in the conduct of the case for the prosecution appears to be in the advocate engaged by the complainant. On 28-4-65 the advocate for the complainant filed an application making the following allegations-

(2.) MR. Misra urges that without applying his mind to the facts and circumstances of this case and the contents of the petition, the learned Magistrate passed the aforesaid order and that it should be set aside.

(3.) ON analysis of the order of the Magistrate it would appear that the application to examine two more witnesses was rejected on 2 grounds-- (1) that the advocate appearing privately for the complainant, did not obtain consent of the Prosecuting inspector in presenting the application and (2) that the two witnesses, sought to be examined, had not been examined by the Investigating Officer during investigation and so it can be said that they did not witness the occurrence.