RAFIQ MOHAMMED Vs. SHARIF MOHAMMED AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An incident occurred on 28.2.1985 in the Court premises at Jaipur. According to the complainant he was beaten by Nasir Mohammad and Sharif Mohammed by blows and kicks after being detained by them. He lodged a report at the police station Sadar, Jaipur and after investigation a challan was presented against Nasir Mohammed for the offences under sections 325 and 341 IPC. The Magistrate took cognizance against Nasir Mohammed. The complainant presented a protest petition and on considering the same, the learned Magistrate called for the attendance register of the office of the General Manager Telephones, where Sharif Mohammed was working and also took into consideration the order-sheet in criminal case pending before a Court and found that though Sharif Muhammed was shown present in the office according to the attendance register but he was present in the Court in some other case on that very day and considering this, cognizance was taken against Sharif Mohammed also. Both Sharif Mohammed and Nasir Mohammed were tried for the offences under sections 323 and 341 Penal Code and found guilty and were convicted by the learned Magistrate on 19th Dec. 1986. Each of them was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 for the offence under Sec. 341 Penal Code and Rs. 400.00 for the offence under Sec. 323 IPC. In default of payment of fine they were directed to undergo simple imprisonment for five days on each count.

(2.) Against this conviction and sentence both the accused preferred appeals and they came to be disposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur on 20th July, 1989. The conviction and sentence of Nasir Mohammed was maintained. As far as accused Sharif Mohammed is concerned, it was held that cognizance against him was not taken properly as the Magistrate did not treat the protest petition as a complaint and did not record the statements under section 202 IPC. He there set aside the conviction of Sharif Mohammed and remanded back the case to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate for proceeding against him according to law.

(3.) Against this decision of the learned Additional Sessions Judge the complainant has filed a revision challenging the setting aside of the conviction of Sharif Mohammed, while Sharif Mohammed has filed a revision praying that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge be set aside and he be discharged. In the third revision petition the petitioner Nasir Mohammed has challenged his conviction. He has also made a prayer that he should be released on probation.