RAM NARAYAN ACHARJEE Vs. ATUL CHANDRA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was granted to the petitioner Ram Narain Acharjee, who has been ordered to pay Rs. 50 as compensation to the accused in the case which he had brought against him for causing hurt.

(2.) The ground which has been taken that the order for compensation is not included in the order of acquittal cannot, we think, be sustained. It is clear that the complainant was then and there called upon to show causes, and the order against him for compensation was made at the same time by the Sub-Deputy Magistrate. It was recorded, it is true, as a postscript to the order of acquittal, but on, the same piece of paper, and formed part of the same order. On the evidence we do not feel disposed to interfere in revision. It appears from the Magistrate s explanation that in his allegations made before this Court the present petitioner has gone outside the record of the case and stated a number of facts which are not to be found there. These facts appear to have, been introduced mainly for the purpose of creating prejudice.

(3.) The main fact on which the petitioner now relies is that he went to the hospital on the day following the alleged occurrence to be treated for an injury to his; finger, that is, the hurt he has complained of in the case. The ticket, of the hospital no doubt shows that be went there for treatment for an injury to the finger. But the Doctor is unable to recollect that there was any such injury, and he now states, in his evidence before the Court that the appearance of the finger may he due to gout or other causes. It would seem that; the petitioner took advantage of an altercation which undoubtedly took place to make out a case of assault against the accused.