SERUMAL Vs. SARAN BEHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case comes on a reference from the Sessions Judge, Jaipur. It was put up for hearing before our brother Sharma J. , but since he considered it proper to refer it to a Division Bench, it has come before us.

(2.) THE facts leading to the reference are that one Serumal presented a complaint against seven accused under sections 325, 341, 504 and 153 I. P. C. THE First Assistant City Magistrate, Jaipur City, Mr. Bhag-chand Soni, framed charges against them under sections 324 and 149 I. P. C. and then he was transferred. When the case came up for hearing before his successor, Mr. Narendra Mohan Saxena, the accused prayed for a de novo trial, which was allowed. On the 19th of August, 1950, the Magistrate ordered the complainant that he should either bring his witnesses himself on the next date or cause them to be summoned through the court after paying their expenses. THE complainant wanted the court to resummon the witnesses by itself at the expanse of the Government but that request was turned down. On an application being made by the complainant, the Sessions Judge, Jaipur has reported that the order of the Magistrate asking the complainant to pay the expenses of the witnesses was not in conformity with the provision of law and that he should be directed to call them at Government expense.