SUNDER SINGH Vs. GURDIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the District Magistrate, Rupar, with the recommendation that the order of the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Rupar, dated the 27th of January, 1969, be set aside and the Magistrate be directed to record the entire evidence in the case and then decide the case.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this case are that the Petitioner Sunder Singh complained to the police that he apprehended danger to his life from the Respondent, Gurdit Singh. On the said complaint, the police put up a challan in the Court of Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Rupar, against the Respondent Gurdit Singh with the prayer that he should be bound down under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Along with the challan, a list of witnesses was given by the police and in all four witnesses were mentioned which the police wanted to examine in support of the prosecution case. The learned Magistrate after having recorded the statement of Sunder Singh and Hari Singh, the two witnesses, came to the conclusion that the story as put forth by the Petitioner was highly unlikely and there was no threat to the life of the complainant. Therefore, proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were terminated.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the Respondent, Shri H. S. Toor, as well as Miss Surjit Kaur Tanque, learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Mr. Toor has argued that the proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, can be dropped by the Magistrate at any stage because it is the subjective satisfaction of the Magistrate trying the case which is to prevail. He submits that the moment the learned Magistrate is satisfied that there is no danger of breach of peace, the proceedings can be dropped by him. In support of this proposition, he has relied on Asghar Khan v. State and Ors. : AIR 1964 All. 391. Chatha Martian v. State, A.I.R. 1953 Tra. Coch. 24. and Sheokaran v. Dulla and Ors. : A.I.R. 1958 Raj. 180.