The jurisdiction and powers of a Magistrate of a district extend throughout such district unless otherwise the jurisdiction has been specially limited to a particular area.

Anant Singh, J.

1. The only point for consideration in this criminal revision application is, whether the learned Subdivisonal Magistrate of Muzaffarpur has jurisdiction to try the proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure when the land: in dispute, being survey plot No. 950 of khata No. 919 of village Hirdopatti, is alleged to have situated within the jurisdiction of Runi Saidpur police station which is under the jurisdiction of Sitamarhi subdivision within the same district of Muzaffarpur.

2. It appears that the learned Subdivisional Magistrate of MuzafYarpur had drawn up a proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with respect to survey plot No. 950 of khata No. 919 of village Hirdopatti, which is said to lie within the jurisdiction of Sitamarhi subdivision of the same district. The proceeding was being tried by another Magistrate, Sri G. C. P. Sinha, holding first class powers, who, by his order dated the 19th October 1959, has held that the land in dispute fell in Katra Police Station which is under the jurisdiction of the Sadar Subdivision of Muzaffarpur. He has further observed that it was of little consequence whether the case was decided in one subdivision or another in the same district. The learned Magistrate has also observed that the parties admitted before him that the disputed land lies in village Bhadai under the Katra police station, which is within the jurisdiction of Sadar Subdivision of Muzaffarpur.

3. It has been challenged on behalf of the petitioner that no such admission was made on his behalf that the land in question situates within the jurisdiction of Katra police station, and that, in fact, the land appertains to village Hirdopatti which is under the Runi Saidpur police station within the subdivision of Sitamarhi. In support of this contention, reliance was placed upon the voters list of the last Legislative Assembly election, the Certified copy of Union Register and some other documents which would show that the plot in question falls in tola Hirdopatti of village Dhobha which is in Runi Saidpur police station under the jurisdiction of Sitamarhi subdivision.

4. The objection regarding jurisdiction was not taken up at the initial stage. It seems to have been taken up when the proceeding was nearing completion. There is, however, no merit in the contention.

5. Sec.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure authorises the State Government to appoint as many Magistrates as necessary in any district, and the State Government or the District Magistrate, subject to the control of the State Government, is authorised to define local areas within which such persons may exercise all or any of the powers with which they may respectively be invested under the Code. Sub-section (2) of this section provides: "Except as otherwise provided by such definition, the jurisdiction and powers of such persons shall extend throughout such district". It follows that the jurisdiction and powers of a Magistrate of a district extend throughout such district, unless otherwise the jurisdiction has been specially limited to a particular area.

6. Reliance, however, has been placed on behalf of the petitioner on the case of Kunj Behari Lal V/s. Lanua, AIR 1921 All 123, decided by the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court sitting singly. The facts of that case are not at all attracted. There, the learned Subdivisional Magistrate had returned a petition of complaint at the initial stage for its presentation to the proper court as he had no jurisdiction which was confined to his subdivision, and it was held that the Subdivisional Magistrate took the right view when he had stated that he having been placed in charge of a subdivision, his jurisdiction was confined to that subdivision, and he could not take cognizance of offences beyond this limit.

7. Reliance on behalf of the petitioner was also placed on another case of Syed Alli Gulam Alli V/s. Emperor, AIR 1938 Nag 448, wherein it was held that