RAMADHIN SINGH Vs. PMETHARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This rule was issued on the District Magistrate of 24 Parganas to show cause why an order passed by Mr. M.B. Roy, Deputy Magistrate on 4 May 1946, should not be set aside.

(2.) The present petitioner filed a petition of complaint before the said Magistrate accusing two persons, P. Metharam and Babulal Chowkhani of offences punishable under Section 323 and 504, Indian Penal Code. On 2 May, 1946, the learned Magistrate passed the following order: Examined the complainant. Summon P. Metharam and Babulal under Section 323/504, Indian Penal Code, fixing 22-5-1946.

(3.) It appears that each of the two accused persons had also filed complaints which in a sense can be regarded as cross cases. On 4 May 1946, the learned Magistrate recorded another order which runs as follows: Read petition filed by accused. It appears that there are 2 counter complaints?one filed by accused Metharam and another by accused Babulal (real name being Babulal Chattani). These have been sent to O/C Tollygunge P.S. for verification and report by 22-5-1946. I am satisfied that summonses on the accused in this case were issued on insufficient grounds. As the counter cases are to be enquired into by the O/C this complaint should also be sent to him for verification and report. So the order issuing summons is rescinded. Send a copy of this complaint to the O/C together with the counter petitions for report by the date fixed.