JUDGMENT:- On a police report, the learned Magistrate took cognisance of a case, and under Section 251-A(2) of the Cr. Pro. Code he discharged the applicant, who was one of the accused; but later on in the course of the trial against the other accused, the learned Magistrate thought it necessary to frame a charge against the present applicant. He, therefore, passed an order saying that he would take cognisance of offence under Section 190(c), Cri. Pro. Code. So he ordered a process to issue against the present applicant.

2. In Revision, it is contended that once cognisance taken, it cannot be taken again and once an order of discharge is passed, the same Magistrate cannot go behind the discharge order unless the appellate Court or revisional Court modifies the order of discharge. These arguments are not sound, because what the Magistrate takes is a cognisance of offence and not of a case. It is, therefore, not necessary to take cognisance again under S. 190(c) of Cr. P. C. The cognisance taken on the police report continues until the whole matter is over.

3. Regarding the argument that once a discharge order has been passed, the learned Magistrate is functus officio. This argument is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document