RAMESH KUMAR Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision filed by Dr. Ramesh Kumar against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, dated 18th July, 1984, by which he remanded the case to the trial Magistrate.

(2.) THE facts which gave rise to this revision are as follows. The petitioner qualified as an M.B.B.S. doctor from the Medical College, Amritsar, in 1979, entered Government service and has been serving as such since then. Subhash Chander respondent lodged a report with the police on 2nd March, 1983, alleging therein that the petitioner was in fact not a member of the Scheduled Castes and was actually a Brahmin and that he managed a false certifacte from the Sub Divisional Officer, Civil, Pathankot, and got a seat in the Medical Colege which was reserved for the members of the Scheduled Castes. The police after the investigation sent up the petitioner for trial in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot. The learned Magistrate after going through the police paper and report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure found that no prima facie case for framing a charge against the petitioner was made out. Consequently, he discharged the petitioner after passing a detailed and elaborate order. Subhash Chander respondent then filed a criminal revision in the Court of Session which culminated in the impugned order. Hence this revision.

(3.) I have gone through the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. He came to the finding that at the stage of framing of the charge only the prima facie nature of the allegations was to be seen and that the learned Magistrate was not required to see whether the prosecution case would end in conviction or not. Thus he remanded the case. I don not think that in revision the Additional Sessions Judge was justified in setting aside the well-reasoned order of the Magistrate. Even if took a different view, that was no ground to remand the case to the Magistrate unless he could find that the view taken by the Magistrate was illegal or perverse or that it could not be reasonably taken. In this view of the matter, I think this petition has to succeed. The impugned order is consequently set aside. Petition succeed.