MADAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to this revision petition are that Shri Udey Singh Gera, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot filed a complaint under section 193, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner, Madal Lal and others on the ground that a civil suit had been decided by the precedessor, Shri I.S. Bajwa and in that case he had observed that the accused had forged and fabricated a will in favour of Tilak Raj and had deposed falsely in Court.

(2.) AS the complaint had been filed by a Court, the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot in whose Court the complaint was filed, did not record any evidence in view of proviso (a) to section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called the Code). The learned Judicial Magistrate summoned the accused and framed the charge. The present revision petition is for quashing the charge.

(3.) IN the light of the above provisions, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that after whole or some prosecution evidence has been recorded, two courses are open to the Magistrate. The first is that if no case against the accused has been made out which, if unrebutted, would warrant his conviction, he shall discharge him, but if he is of the opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which he is competent to try and could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame a charge against the accused.