SMT. ROSHNI Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge, Kangra under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Shrimati Roshni was accused of an offence under Sec. 447 of the Indian Penal Code and was convicted by a First Class Magistrate on November 20, 1970 and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50 and in default to simple imprisonment for one month. An appeal filed by Smt. Roshni came on for hearing before the learned Sessions Judge, Kangra. In the view that under Sec. 207 of the Himachal Pradesh Pan -chayati Raj Act, 1969, the case should have been transferred by the Magistrate to the Nyaya Panchayat Mehla, within whose jurisdiction the case fell, he has recommended that the conviction and sentence be quashed and an appropriate direction be made.

(3.) It appears to me that the recommendations of the learned Sessions Judge must be accepted. An offence under Sec. 447 of the Indian Penal Code is triable by a Nyaya Panchayat. That is clear from Sec. 203 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act read with Entry 31 of Schedule II to the Act. The Act was brought into force on November 15, 1970, while the proceeding was still pending before the Magistrate. A proceeding remains pending so long as it is not disposed of by an order. That was the view taken in Emperor v/s. Fazal Rahman, AIR 1937 Pesh. 52 and Workmen of Mjs Bali Singh Bhagwan Singh v/s. Management of Mjs Bali Singh Bhagwan Singh : AIR 1969 P&H 147 The proceeding was still pending with the Magistrate and, on November 15, 1970, therefore, he should have acted under Sec. 207 of the Act. Sec. 207 provides: