FUZLAR RAHAMAN Vs. ABEDOR RAHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Rule calling on the District Magistrate of Chittagong and on the apposite party to show cause why the order complained of should not be set aside. What happened is this: The complainant s brother was undoubtedly murdered--shot dead. The complainant lodged an information before the Police. The record does not show any judicial examination either of the complainant or of any of the witnesses that he wished to produce in support of his complaint. The learned trying: Magistrate came to the conclusion--and in this view he was supported by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-that the case was one in which no Jury would convict the person complained against Therefore, he refused to, summon the accused. In this case he struck far too soon. The case is one of a most serious nature and- it was the duty of the learned Magistrate to examine the complainant and the witnesses he wished to produce in order to see whether he ought to summon the person complained against. If, after having done that, he came to the conclusion that there Was no case against the person complained against then, provided the view he took of the evidence was a reasonable one, it is not likely that the Court would interfere in a case of this nature. But to dispose of the case without examining any of the witnesses is one that cannot be supported in a case of this nature. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned trying Magistrate and of the Sessions Judge and send back the case to the trying Magistrate, in order that he should examine the complainant and the witnesses he wished to produce in support of his case.