EMPEROR Vs. BHIMABAI SITARAM MANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision made by the Government of Bombay, and the question which arises is as to the jurisdiction of the Bench Magistrates.

(2.) The material facts are that there was a complaint against certain persons under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, of causing hurt. That complaint was heard by three Magistrates constituting a bench, each of them being a Magistrate having second class powers. They dismissed the complaint, and then under Sec. 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code called upon the complainant to show cause why he should not be ordered to pay compensation to the accused on the ground that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious, and the learned Magistrate directed the complainant to pay Rs. 10 to each of the five accused. An appeal was then made to the District Magistrate at Satara who sent the case to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for disposal. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate held that he had jurisdiction to deal with the appeal. He allowed the appeal and set aside the order for paying compensation.

(3.) The question of jurisdiction which arises is this. If the bench of Magistrates which heard the case had only second class powers, then an appeal would lie to the Divisional Magistrate. But if the bench had first class powers, then, if there had been any appeal at all, it would have been to the Sessions Judge, But as the compensation directed did not exceed Rs. 50 there would be no appeal, having regard to the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 250. The question involves the construction of Section 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code and of a notification of Government thereunder.