ALLADI KUPPUSWANIL, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners herein are accused N,os. 1 and 4 in P. R. C. No. 14 of 1977 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, narasaraopet, who is the second respondent in this writ petition. The petitioners and three others were arrested and produced before the second respondent on 3rd December, 1977. In the remand report it was stated that one Chandra Satyanarayana was attacked by these five accused on 17th November, 1977 at about 9 A. M. A-4 beat him with an axe on his head. A-1 speared him on his left stomach and all the accused beat the deceased indiscriminately. Satyanarayana died instantaneously. They also beat Chandra Narayya who was with Satyanarayana and he received injuries. The second respondent remanded all the accused to judicial custody under section 167, Criminal Procedure Code, till 15th December, 1977. On a memo, filed by the police, the remand was extended till 28th December, 1977. Meanwhile a charge-sheet (report under section 190 (1) (b), Criminal Procedure Code) was filed on 17th December, 1977 charging a-4 of an offence under section 302, Indian penal Code and all the accused under section 302, Indian Penal Code read with section 149, indian Penal Code. A-2 and A-3 were also charged with an offence under section 324, indian Penal Code and A-5 under section 323, indian Penal Code, A-1 to A-4 under section 148, Indian Penal Code and A-5 under section 147, Indian Penal Code. The second respondent took the case on file under the above sections and posted the case to 28th December, 1977 to which date the accused had been remanded to judicial custody. On 28th december, 1977 all the accused were present and remanded and the matter was posted on 4th January, 1978. Again, on 4th January, 1978, the accused were present, but observing that c report was not received (referring obviously to a report of the chemical examiner to whom certain material objects were sent for examination), the second respondent posted the case to 7th January, 1978. Again for the same reason the case was adjourned from 7th January, 1978 to 12th January, 1978. Thereafter the case underwent the following adjournments from 12th January, 1978 to 21st January, 1978, from 21st January, 1978 to 28th January, 1978, from 28th January, 1978 to 3rd February, 1978, from 3rd February, 1978 to 10th February, 1978, from 10th february, 1978 to 17th February, 1978 and from 17th February, 1978 to 27th February, 1978.

( 2 ) MEANWHILE all the accused filed a bail application, Crl. M. P. No. 68 of 1978 in this Court. By an order, dated 23rd January, 1978 this Court directed accused 2, 3 and 5 to be released on bail on certain conditions. It however dismissed the application in so far as accused 1 and 4, namely, the petitioners herein were concerned.

( 3 ) THE petitioners herein have filed this writ petition praying for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus directing the production of the petitioners herein. They also applied in w. P. M. P. No. 983 of 1978 that this Court may grant bail to the petitioners on suitable terms pending disposal of the writ petition.

( 4 ) THE main contention urged on behalf of the petitioners by Sri T. V. Sarma, is that the Criminal Procedure Code provides for remand under section 167, Criminal Procedure Code, but the moment the report is filed under section 173 (1) and (2), the Magistrate is divested of his jurisdiction to remand under section 167. Once cognizance of offence is taken there is no power to adjourn or remand by a Magistrate under section 209, criminal Procedure Code. The only course for the Magistrate under section 209, Criminal Procedure Code, is to commit the accused to session. The Magistrate instead of committing them on the day when he took cognizanca of the offence adjourned the case from time to time without any sanction of law and continued to remand the accused to custody. Thus the Magistrate in violation of the procedure established by law exercised jurisdicti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document