MT. SARJI Vs. MT. BHIMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MUNJE , A.J.C. 1. This is an application to revise the order of the District Magistrate, Wardha, by which he exempted the accused Mt. Bhimi, the non-applicant here, from personal attendance through the trial. The applicant Mt. Sarji has filed a complaint against Bhimi for an offence under Section 323, I.P.C. and the case is being tried by the Tahsildar, Wardha. To start with, a summons was issued to her; she was served but, instead of appearing in person, she sent her husband to represent her. The Court ordered the husband to produce the accused in person, but she did not so appear and this time sent a pleader to represent herself. The case, however, could not be taken up for some reasons for two hearings and on the adjourned hearing the Magistrate again ordered a summons to issue to the accused. No process fee was paid by the complainant and thereupon the complaint was dismissed under Section 204(3), Criminal P.C.

(2.) THE case went to the District Magistrate, who thereafter sent the case for disposal to another Magistrate. Eventually, however, the case was again sent back to the Tahsildar and the accused was again summoned. On the date of the hearing the accused again appeared through a pleader and made an application for being exempted from personal attendance. This was not allowed and, instead, a bailable warrant of arrest was issued against her. She was not found and it appeared to the Court that she was avoiding service. A proclamation under Section 87 was therefore issued and, after it was published, the trial commenced under Section 512. Another warrant of arrest was again issued against her.

(3.) THE first contention is that the order of the District Magistrate was without jurisdiction as, at that stage no appeal could lie, nor could any such order be passed in revision except by this Court. This has been conceded by the other side, but it is urged on behalf of the accused that the District Magistrate's order, though defective in this respect, could be maintained as this Court had power to pass the very same order in revision. The powers of this Court under Sections 435 and 439, Criminal P.C., are wide and a High Court can proceed in the matter even suo motu and interfere if it considers just and proper. A High Court can call for and examine, the record of any proceedings and interfere even when a certain order, though legal, is improper.