MOHENDRA NATH SAHU Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case the accused who is the petitioner set up a bar in 3. 403, Criminal P.C. His ground was that a previous prosecution under Section 182, I.P. C, in respect of the matter of which he is now being tried was withdrawn by the Crown and he was acquitted. Subsequently the present prosecution under Section 182 was started. Now the answer to his plea is that on the first occasion the complaint under Section 182 was by an officer who does not come within the description of Section 195(1)(a), Criminal P.C., so that the Magistrate could not lawfully take cognizance upon his complaint and the trial was wholly without jurisdiction. Section 403 is only a bar in respect of a previous trial by a Court of competent jurisdiction.

(2.) THE present complaint has been made by the officer described in Section 195 (a) and upon his complaint cognizance has been duly taken and the accused is regularly put upon his trial. To the present trial it is not a bar that he was previously placed on trial without jurisdiction. It is therefore not necessary to consider the further point made by the District Magistrate that there is no bar to the present trial inasmuch as the trial in the previous case has not actually begun. THE rule is discharged. Let the papers be sent down forthwith and let the long delayed trial proceed with all convenient speed.