ORDER : The opponent Purushottamdas son of Kanhayalal was prosecuted for offences under sections 93 (1) and 98 (1) of the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act. The trial Court acquitted the accused. Thereafter the Municipal Committee, Warud, through its prosecutor filed an application under S. 435, Criminal Procedure Code, to the Court of Sessions Judge, Amravati. The learned Sessions Judge after having called for the record has recommended that under Sec. 439, Criminal Procedure Code, the acquittal of the accused should he set aside. This reference is opposed by the learned Government Pleader on the ground that under Sec. 439 revision proceedings are incompetent at the instance of a private party in view of sub-sec, (5) of Sec. 439. In case it is held that such a revision under Sec. 439 is incompetent the reference will have to be rejected. The learned Counsel appearing for the opponent Purushottamdas has supported the objection of the learned Government Pleader.

(2) This question was also raised before the learned Sessions Judge and he has dealt with it in paragraph 6 of his order. The learned Sessions Judge has taken the view that Sec. 417, Criminal Procedure Code, regulates the pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document