MD YASIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application to quash certain proceedings pending against the petitioners, or, in the alternative to transfer the case from the file of the present Magistrate.

(2.) SO far as the matter of quashing is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioners did not press that matter so earnestly as the question of transfer, because if he succeeded on the question of transfer he would place the submissions on behalf of the accused before the Court below in support of the contention that the accused should have been discharged, as there was no evidence upon which the charges could have been framed against them.

(3.) ON the question of transfer Sir Sultan Ahmad has based his submissions for transfer largely on the ground that the present Magistrate has been very slow in his work and that he did not enforce his judicial authority to secure the attendance of witnesses in time and allowing the case to take an unreasonably long time for disposal. He further pointed out that when the accused were examined by the Magistrate under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code, the Magistrate put certain questions to the accused which were given to him in writing by the prosecution and that the Magistrate put several questions simultaneously to the accused and demanded answers for all of them at one time, with the result that the accused were confused and could not reply to the questions put to them. He further made reference to an interpolation in the order -sheet of the Magistrate, order No. 249, dated 24.7.1953. If these various matters were taken into consideration the cumulative effect of them would be for the accused to enter tain a reasonable apprehension that they would not receive a fair trial at the hands of the Magistrate.