ASWINI KUMAR DAS Vs. RAMAN CHANDRA MOHANTA,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent in this case filed a complaint before Shri S. N. Roy Choudhury, the S. D. M. of Dharmanagar against the petitioner Aswini Kumar Das and another Nalini Kumar Das accusing them of criminal trespass and assault and against Nalini Kumar Das further for outraging the modesty of complainant's sister -in -law. The S. D. M. took cognisance of the case and transferred the case to a second class Magistrate Shri S. R. Chakravorty. He dealt with the case for sometime and examined the complainant and 2 P. Ws. and while the matter was pending before him for further trial, Shri A. Bhattacherjee who had become S. D. M. by then withdrew the case to his own file and after the examination of further P. Ws. he framed charges under Sections 447 and 352 against the petitioner and Nalini Kumar Das and a further charge under Section 354 Indian Penal Code against Nalini Kumar Das. Then Shri A. Bhattacharjee ceased to be the S. D. M. but continued to be the magistrate, first class at Dharmanagar. He proceeded with the trial of the case as first class magistrate and all the 4 P. Ws. who had already been examined were further cross -examined for the defence and as the prosecution closed its case, the accused were examined under Section 342 and time was given for examination of D. Ws. After some more adjournments, the defence stated on 9 -12 -59 that they would not examine any D. Ws. and the case was then posted for arguments to 2 -2 -6o. One is unable to understand why in a case where only 4 P. Ws. were examined the case should have been adjourned by nearly 2 months for arguments. This is only a sample of the way in which cases are unnecessarily adjourned by magistrates. Even on 2 -2 -60 arguments were not heard and it was again adjourned to 10 -3 -60.

(2.) ON 10 -3 -60, Sri A. Bhattacharjee passed an order transferring the case to the file of another first class magistrate Shri W. U. Mulla for disposal. We are unable to know the reasons for this transfer. All that remained was to hear arguments and to deliver judgment and the magistrate who should normally do this is the magistrate who tried the case. Still Shri A. Bhattacharjee who was not empowered to transfer the case under Section 192 Criminal Procedure Code transferred it to Shri W. U. Mulla for disposal. Shri W. U. Mulla heard arguments on 15 -3 -60 and delivered judgment on 31 -3 -60 convicting the petitioner and Nalini Kumar Das and sentencing the petitioner to pay a fine of Rs. 15/ - on each of the two charges under Sections 447 and 352 and Nalini Kumar Das Rs. 15/ -under each of the three charges under Sections 447, 332 and 354 Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE petitioner and Nalini Kumar Das filed a revision before the Sessions Judge. But the Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition on 25.7.1960. The petitioner alone has filed the present revision in this Court on 30.8.1960. It may also be mentioned that after the dismissal of the revision by the Sessions Judge when the papers went back to the magistrate's Court, the magistrate issued non -bailable warrant for the arrest of the petitioner and Nalini Kumar Das evidently for realisation for the fine and finally Nalini Kumar Das appeared in Court and paid the fine. But the fine was not realised from the petitioner as stay of realisation of the fine was passed by this Court.