LAWS(PVC)-1906-7-31

EMPEROR Vs. VISHWANATH KRISHNA SATHE

Decided On July 27, 1906
EMPEROR Appellant
V/S
VISHWANATH KRISHNA SATHE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Laxmandas appeared before the Police and was by the Police referred to the Magistrate, with the intimation that he should make an application to the Magistrate and that they would then enquire. Laxmandas then made his representation to the Magistrate stating certain circumstances and the City Magistrate, Poona, before whom the said representation was made sent it to the Police with authority to investigate and report.

(2.) The Sessions Judge who makes the reference states in his grounds of reference that the City Magistrate under the belief that an offence had been committed sent the matter to the Police for enquiry. There is nothing before us to show whether the City Magistrate believed or suspected this. An investigation was made by the Police and certain registered and insured packets produced by Laxmandas were returned to the Magistrate with a report as to the result of their investigation. The City Magistrate then made a further enquiry and examined one Sathe on solemn affirmation and after that examination of Sathe on solemn affirmation the registered insured packets which formed the subject of the enquiry and which were addressed to Sathe c/o Laxmandas were opened. Then it appeared that instead of containing currency notes as sworn to by Sathe they contained blank bits of papers. The City Magistrate then ordered Sathe to be taken before another Magistrate for enquiry whether he had committed an offence of perjury in respect of his having sworn in the statement aforesaid that these packets contained currency notes.

(3.) The case has been referred to us by the Sessions Judge, Poona, on the ground that the order under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Code was not a legal order. In making the reference the Sessions Judge says: "Here the learned Magistrate had no complaint before him nor did he examine the complainant -both of which are conditions precedent to the delegation of the enquiry. As the matter was sent without jurisdiction to the Chief Constable the whole enquiry before him would seem to be null and void."