A. SAMBASIVA RAO, J.

( 1 ) 1. This criminal revision ctse arises in the following manner : On 6th November, 1970 the husband of the 9th respondent in the case was killed She claims to have been in the company of the deceased at the time of the occurrence. She laid a complaint to the Police, who registered a case against some persons. Thereafter she approached the judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoni and presented to him a petition to record her and some other persons statements under Sec. 164 Cr. P. C. The Magistrate said that he could not record the statements for two reasons. Firstly, there was no direction from the Sessions Judge. Kurnool that he could record statements from Alur Taluk; and secondly, he could not record Sec. 164 Cr. P. C. statements when required to do so by private persons. The matter was carried to the Sessions court, Kurnool in Crl. M. P. No. 326 of 1970; By his order dated 19th november 1970, the learned Sessions Judge, following the decision In re C. W Casse said that when a matter was still under investigation, a Magistrate may record Sec. 164 Cr. P. C. statements even if the area did not lie within his territorial jurisdiction. Further he observed that t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document