(1) This revision is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2001, whereby the learned Sessions Judge set aside the applicant's conviction for offences punishable under Sections 186 and 353 of the Penal Code but maintained his conviction for offence punishable under Section 427 of the Penal Code, as also the sentence of simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 400/- imposed upon him by the learned judicial Magistrate First Class, Saoli, District Chandrapur.

(2) It was alleged that the applicant and several others had obstructed complainant Mirkhurshid Ali, a Forester, and one Nannaware, a Forest Guard, when they were in the process of stopping illegal carrying of fuel wood from the forest. A bag containing official papers of the complainant was snatched from Nannaware and papers were allegedly torn. On a report by Mirkhurshid Ali, the police registered offences punishable under Sections 353, 332 and 427 of the Penal Code and seem to have also added offence punishable under Section 186 of the Penal Code. On completion of investigation, a charge- sheet was sent to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Saoli.

The learned Magistrate charged the applicant of offences punishable under Sections 186, 353, 332 and 427 of the Penal Code, Since the applicant pleaded not guilty, he was put on trial, at which the prosecution examined in all six witnesses to bring home the guilt of the applicant. After considering the evidence tendered, the learned Magistrate acquitted the applicant of offence punishable under Section 332 of the Penal Code, but convicted and sentenced him for offences punishable under Sections 186, 353 and 427 of the Penal Code.

(3) On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the conviction of the applicant for offences punishable under Sections 186 and 353 of the Penal Code, holding that the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 186 of the Penal Code upon a police report, or, in other words, in the absence of a complaint from the officer concerned. The learned Additional Sessions Judge held that the offence punishable under Section 353 of the Penal Code was a connected offence or one of the same genre as that punishable under Section 186 of the Penal Code and, therefore, even for that offence, conviction could not have been handed down in view of the provisions of Section 195(l)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The State has not preferred any proceeding against that part of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Aggrieved by confirmation of his conviction for offence punishable under Section 427 of the Penal Code and sentence of simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 400/- imposed upon him by the learned Magistrate, the applicant is before this Court.

(4) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned APP for the State. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the causation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that offence punishable under Section 427 of the Penal Code was independent or unconnected is not correct. He submitted that when the entire event, comprising of obstruction to complainant Mirkhurshid Ali and one Nannaware, as also snatching of the papers and tearing them, was a part of same transaction the learned Additional Sessions Judge should have held that even cognizance of offence punishable under Section 427 of the Penal Code not have been taken by the learned Magistrate, except upon a complaint in writing by the public servant, who was obstructed in discharge of his duties.

6A. It is not necessary to examine this contention. In fact it is addition of Section 186 of the Penal Code by the police which has resulted in this mischief. As rightly submitted by the learned APP, it would have to be examined as to whether the offence punishable under Section 427 of the Penal Code was made out