MOOLCHAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS reference comes on the report of the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, dated 8. 2. 1957. The facts giving rise to it are that the Municipal Board, Bikaner, through its Executive Officer, presented a complaint in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Bikaner City, against one Moolchand for an offence under sec. 1 0 of the Municipal Act. The case was tried by the Second Glass Magistrate since it was transferred to him. He issued summons to the accused and fixed the case for hearing on 25. 8. 1956. The case could not be taken up on that day since it turned out to be a holiday. The case was then adjourned to 25. 9. 1956 ; but it could not be heard since the Magistrate had gone to Kotah for giving his own evidence in some case. The case was, therefore, fixed for hearing on 16. 10. 1956. On this date the plea of the accused was recorded and then the case was fixed for prosecution evidence on 7. 11. 1956. When the case was taken up on this date (7. 11. 1956 , counsel for the accused requested the court that the complainant was absent and, therefore, the accused should be acquitted. Thereupon counsel for the complainant presented an application to exempt the complainant from personal attendance. It is not clear whether the parties were not prepared for arguments on this application or whether the Magistral could not make up his mind ; but the case was adjourned to 12. 10. 1956 tor arguments. The arguments were actually heard on 15. 11. 1956. On this date, the Magistrate passed an order exempting the complainant, namely the Executive Officer from his personal attendance. He rejected the prayer of the accused for his acquittal under sec. 247 Cr. P. C. Against this order the accused filed a revision application in the court of the Sessions Judge at Bikaner. The learned Sessions Judge is of the view that the Magistrate ought to have acquitted the accused since the complainant was absent on 16-l0-1956 and 7. 11. 1956 and, therefore, he has recommended that this order should now be passed by this Court.

(2.) NEITHER party has cared to appear in this Court.