RAJU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision in preferred against the order dated 21-8-1974 of learned Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner, dismissing the petitioner's application for revoking the order of taking cognizance dated 16-71973, against him under Section 304a, I. P. C.

(2.) THE facts briefly stated are these: that in a case under Section 304a, I. P. C. the police presented a final report before the Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner. The learned Magistrate disagreeing with the opinion of the S. H. O. took cognizance of the offence under Section 304a, I. P. C. against the accused-petitioner, on 16-7-63 who, thereafter, presented an application that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of offence under the Cr. P. C. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the new Code) and therefore, the order should be revoked. The learned Magistrate rejected this application of the accused-petitioner while holding that even under the new Code, he has the power and jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 (1) (c) of it.

(3.) IT was argued by the learned Counsel for the accused-petitioner that the learned Magistrate was in error in taking cognizance of the offence, because under Section 190 (1) (c) of the new Code the words "or suspicion", after the words "his own knowledge" has been deleted, and therefore, the Magistrate could not take -cognizance on his own suspicion, against the accused-petitioner. The learned Publie Prosecutor opposed this contention and argued that the learned Magistrate could take cognizance of the offence on his own knowledge which is derived from the police papers and the final report submitted to him. This was permissible under Section 190 (1) (c) of the new Code.