( 1 ) CRIMINAL Revision Application is filed by original complainant to set aside the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad in Criminal case No. 3562 of 1987 on 21-12-1988 and to direct him to proceed further according to law.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is the original complainant of Criminal Case No. 3562 of 1987 which was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad against the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 (hereinafter referred to as the accused. Said complaint was filed for the offences punishable under Secs. 406, 114 and 34 of I. P. C.

( 3 ) THE complainant was examined by Chief Judicial Magistrate Shri M. R. Thakar before taking cognizance, and as in the opinion of the Magistrate taking cognizance of offence there was sufficient ground for proceeding further, the magistrate issued summons for the offences punishable under Secs. 420 and 114 of I. P. C. and also for the offences punishable under Secs. 406 and 114 of i. P. C. After issuance of summons, the Magistrate was required to follow the procedure laid down in Chapter XIX of Code of Criminal Procedure, i. e. . Trial of Warrant Cases by Magistrate. This case being a case instituted otherwise than on a Police report, Magistrate was required to follow the procedure laid down in Sec. 244 and onwards. Section 244 reads as under :" (1) When, in any warrent 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". In the instant case, it appears that succeeding Magistrate without recording any evidence acquitted the accused persons taking shelter of Sec. 245 (2) of criminal Procedure Code. Section 245 reads as under :" (1) If upon taking all the evidence referred to in Sec. 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. "being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Chief Judicial magistrate, Nadiad on 21-12-1988, present petition is preferred. In a private complaint, Magistrate has to examine the complainant as per Sec. 200 of Cr. P. C. If after considering statement on oath of the complainant, if the Magistrate is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding, he can dismiss the complaint, of course, by giving reasons in brief. Now if the magistrate is of the opinion while taking cognizance of an offence that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, then he has to issue process against the accused. Thereafter ordinarily it is not permissible to the Magistrate to switch over to a previous stage. What law requires is that he has to record evidence as contemplated in Sec. 244 of Criminal Procedure Code. As per section, magistrate shall hear the prosecution and shall take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. Therefore, it becomes bounded duty of the Magistrate to record evidence which may be produced by the complainant. Section 245 of the Code contemplates that after taking of the evidence referred to Sec. 244, if the Magistrate considers that no case against accused is made out, which warrants his conviction, the Magistrate shall discharge him for which he shall also record his reasons. Section 245 comes after the evidence is recorded but Sec. 245 (2) provides that at any previous stage of the case, if for reasons to be recorded by such Magistrate, if he considers charge to be groun