UNTWALIA, J.

1. In G.R. Case No. 1084 of 1965 a Judicial Magistrate at Chaibassa by order dated the 19th December, 1970 refused to adjourn the case further and to issue summonses to the prosecution witnesses at its instance. He closed the prosecution case and proceeded to examine the accused under Sec.342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure hereinafter called the Code. There were two accused and they had been charged of having committed embezzlement of Rs. 85/-. Thus, they are said to have committed offences under Sections 409 and 120-B of the Penal Code. The State applied to the Sessions Judge of Singhbhum at Chaibassa for making a reference to this Court under Sec. 438 of the Code. The learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibassa, on the basis of some decisions of High Courts thought that the order passed by the Magistrate was not justified in law. According to him, the learned Magistrate "had committed fatal irregularities in having not allowed the prosecution to have adduced evidence for which the Court had already issued processes and to have closed the case without waiting for service return and after calling for a fresh list of witnesses without having issued proce