MOJIBUR RAHMAN, Vs. MOHAMMAD SIDDIQUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing an order dated the 29th January, 1971, passed by the Sub -divisional Magistrate, Darbhanga Sadar, taking cognizance and summoning the petitioners for trial for offences under Ss. 147, 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, and cancelling the jurisdiction of the Gram Cutcherry. The case of the complainant -opposite party, in short, was that in the evening of the 29th May, 1969, Kasimunnissa (petitioner no. 3) purchased some meat from the shop of the opposite party, but when he demanded the price, she wanted to pay it some time later, to which he was not agreeable and snatched the meat which petitioner no. 3 had taken. There was exchange of hot words between them and petitioner no. 3 thereafter went away. After about two hours, petitioner no. 3, along with the other three petitioners, who were armed with Lathis, came to the Darwaza of the complainant -opposite party with the intention of assaulting him. On seeing them, the complainant -opposite party fled to his Angan, where also the petitioners are alleged to have chased him and after entering into the Angan assaulted him. The prosecution case further is that while leaving the place, the petitioners took away a bucket, a Bidhna and a Dari, worth about Rs. 32/ -.

(2.) On the 31st May, 1969, the opposite party filed a complaint petition before the Sub -divisional Magistrate complaining about the said occurrence and alleging that the local police and the Gram Panchayat were in collusion with the accused persons, and, therefore, the complaint petition was filed in the court. The Sub -divisional Magistrate after perusing the complaint petition, sent the same to Shree R.P. Mukherjee, Magistrate First Class, Darbhanga, for an inquiry and report. On receipt of the report, the Sub -divisional Magistrate, dismissed the complaint on the 21st August, 1969. Thereafter, the complainant moved the Sessions Judge for further inquiry and the learned Additional Sessions Judge who heard the matter, set aside the dismissal order as it was passed without examining the complainant on solemn affirmation and directed further inquiry to be made. On the 29th January, 1971 the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation and the impugned order, taking cognizance and summoning the petitioners was passed and the jurisdiction of the Gram Cutcherry was cancelled.

(3.) Mr. Q.A. Rahman, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has urged that the order of the Sub -divisional Magistrate taking cognizance was illegal, inasmuch as the learned Magistrate has first taken cognizance and after that cancelled the jurisdiction of the Gram Cutcherry. Relevant portion of the impugned order of the learned Sub -divisional Magistrate may usefully be quoted: - -