GOSTO BEHARY BASU Vs. BAISTOM DAS DENRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have been convicted under Section 186, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to pay fines of Rs. 150, Rs. 30 and Rs. 75 respectively. The Magistrate purported to dispose of the case under summary procedure. So under Section 414, Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners had no right of appeal. They moved the Sessions Judge for a reference to this Court, but without success.

(2.) The circumstances under Which we issued a Rule are as follows. The petitioners were summoned under Section 186 and Section 206, Indian Penal Code. Offences under the latter section cannot be tried summarily, and the learned Magistrate began to try the case under Chapter XXI, recording the evidence in the manner prescribed in Chapter XXV. Seven witnesses for the prosecution were thus examined-in-chief on September 17th, the accused were also examined on that day. Then the Magistrate recorded this order: "As no offence under Section 206, Indian Penal Code, has been made out, the case will go on under Sections 186, 143, Indian Penal Code, and will be tried under Section 260, Criminal Procedure Code." Afterwards, on the 29 of September, the prosecution witnesses were re-called for cross- examination. Then defence witnesses were examined, and the Magistrate then made use of one of the forms authorized for use in summary trials, and recorded a judgment, which began on the first page of that summary form.

(3.) So far as the examination of the witnesses is concerned, it may be that the record is as full as it would have been if there had been no change of procedure. The cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses covers a fair amount of paper, and, save of the fact that the usual details of parentage, residence and occupation are not given, the same is true of the evidence given by the defence witnesses.