(1.) THIS is a reference made by Sessions Judge, Nahan. The point referred for decision is: Whether a Sessions Judge is debarred from trying a case which has been previously committed by him under Section 209 Cr. P. C. in his capacity as a. Chief Judicial Magistrate?
(2.) THE relevant facts are these. Shri A. L. Vaidya was working as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan, in 1978. The accused-respondents were produced before him by the police with a report that the accused have committed offences under Sections 302/307/447/427/147/148/149 of the Penal Code, The Magistrate, after ensuring that copies of the statements of the witnesses and of all other documents on which the prosecution relied were given to the accused, committed them to face a trial before the Court of Session. The then learned Sessions Judge framed a charge against the accused under Sections 304 (Part-I) 325/148/149 of the Penal Code. However, when the case came up for trial, Shri A. L. Vaidya came to be the Sessions Judge. An application was made on behalf of the accused that they be tried by some other court since the case stood committed by Shri A. L. Vaidya acting as Chief Judicial Magistrate.
(3.) MR. Arun Kumar Goel, learned Counsel for the accused, contends that since Shri Vaidya had applied his mind to find out whether there was a prima facie case against the accused at the time of committing them to the Court of Session, he should not try the accused. In other words, since Shri Vaidya has already given a finding adverse to the accused, it will not be in the interest of justice that he should try them.