( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. seeking quashing of C. C. No. 5/99 pending on the file of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. This petition raises an interesting and important question of law. Counter has been filed and I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Stay has been granted by this Court and a vacate stay application has also been filed. Since the pleadings are complete and the matter was heard in detail the matter is finally decided.

( 2 ) A private complaint has been filed against the petitioner for the offence under Section 420, I. P. C. and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate issued summons to the petitioner and after his appearance framed a charge under Section 420, I. P. C. and Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the procedure adopted by the Magistrate in framing the charge is illegal in view of the provisions of Sections 244, 245 and 246 of the Criminal Procedure Code, whereas the contention of the respondent is that the procedure laid down by the Criminal Procedure Code for taking cognizance and framing of charge in complaints filed otherwise than on a Police report has been complied with. It is admitted case of both the parties that no evidence was taken by the Magistrate before the charge was framed. In the light of this admitted position, it is necessary to appreciate the import of Sections 244, 245 and 246 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In fact Sections 238 to 243 of the Code deal with the procedure regarding warrant-cases instituted on Police report whereas Sections 244 to 246 deal with warrant-cases otherwise than on Police report. The present case is a warrant-case but instituted otherwise than on a Police report. Therefore, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that it has to be dealt with in accordance with Sections 244 to 246 of the Code. For the purpose of present controversy this Court needs to examine Sections 244, 245 and 246. All the three sections are reproduced herein below :-"244. (1) When, in any warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a Police report, the accused appears or is brought before a Magistrate, the Magistrate shall proceed to hear the prosecution and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. (2) The Magistrate may, on the application of the prosecution, issue a summons to any of its witnesses directing him to attend or to produce any document or other thing. 245. (1) If, upon taking all the evidence referred to in Section 244, the Magistrate considers, for reasons to be recorded that no case against the accused has been made out which, if unrebutted would warrant his conviction, the Magistrate shall discharge him. (2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a Magistrate from discharging the accused at any previous stage of the case, if for reasons to be recorded by such Magistrate, he considers the charge to be groundless. 246. (1) If, when such evidence has been taken, or at any previous stage of the case, the Magistrate is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under this chapter, which such Magistrate is competent to try and which, in his opinion, could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused. (2) The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make. (3) If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate shall record the plea and may, in his discretion, convict him thereon. (4) If the accused refuses to plead, or does not plead or claims to be tried or if the accused is not convicted under sub-section (3), he shall be required to state, at the commencement of the next hearing of the case, or, if the Magistrate for reasons to be recorded in writing so thinks fit, forth- with, whether he wishes to cross-examine any, and, if so