A.C. Upadhyay, J.

1. This revision is directed against the order passed on 07.07.2009 by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pasighat in P.S. Case No. 02/09, in corresponding G.R. Case No. 02/09, under Sections 451/497 IPC, whereby the learned Magistrate discharged the accused purportedly in exercise of powers under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The facts, leading to the filing of the criminal revision, may be stated in brief, as follows:

The petitioner lodged an Ejahar on 14.01.2009 stating therein that accused Shri Tapan Chandra Kar, JE, PWD, Pasighat, who was residing in an adjacent residential quarters, situated near Kalimandir, Pasighat, committed adultery/illicit sexual intercourse with his wife, namely, Smt. Minam Borang during his absence from Pasighat. It was also stated in the Ejahar that accused Shri Tapan Chandra Kar confessed the commission of adultery/illicit sexual intercourse with the wife of the petitioner during the absence of the petitioner from Pasighat. The petitioner also stated in the Ejahar that his wife, Smt. Minam Borong, confessed before him that the accused Shri Tapan Chandra Kar took undue advantage of his physical incapacity.

3. On receipt of the Ejahar from the petitioner, a case was registered Under Section 451/497 I.P.C. and an investigation was launched. On completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet in the Court of Deputy Commissioner, East Siang District, Pasighat, against the accused Shri Tapan Chandra Kar, alleging commission of offence under Sections 451/497 IPC. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, East Siang District, Pasighat transferred the case to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pasighat for trial.

4. Section 239 of the Cr. P. C. empowers the Magistrate to discharge the accused, in the event the learned Magistrate considers the charge against the accused to be groundless. However in doing so the learned Magistrate has to record his reasons. In the instant case, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 239 of the Cr.P.C, the learned Magistrate discharged the accused of the offence Under Section 451/497 I.P.C, alleged, by writing the following order:

ORDER

7/7/09 Accused persons present in the court with bailor Shri Tamat Gamon, Pasighat today. Ld. P.P. Sri Iftekar Ahmed is also present. Heard the prosecution. Perused the case records. On perusal, it appears that both the alleged accused persons are fined by Kebang Authority of D.C.'s Office, Pasighat as per decision passed by the Kebang on dated 23/6/09 for Rs. 2500/- each and Rs. 1500/- was imposed as fine on bailor. Further the Kebang authority opinioned that there was no commission or the offences by the accusd persons.

In view of the above observation of Ld. Kebang authority and after careful examination of the case records, there is no materials to establish a charge under Section 451/497 IPC against the accused persons. Hence I hereby discharge the accd. Persons namely Shri Tapan Chandra Kar and Smt. Minam Borang (Gao) in pursuant to Section 239 of the Cr.P.C.

The bond and bail bond executed by the accused persons and bailor and Affidavit etc. are hereby discharged.

Seized articles if any in this case connection be disposed off with due process of law.

Pronounced in the open Court today under my signature and seal of the court.

Issue accordingly.

Sd/- Mrs. N. Kumar

Judicial Magistrate First Class

Pasighat.

5. Careful perusal of the conclusion recorded by the learned Court below, in the impugned order, discharging the accused, reveals that no reason, whatsoever, has been recorded as to how the learned Court below has arrived at such findings. Section 239 of the Code specifically empowers the Magistrate to discharge the accused if in the opinion of the Magistrate the charges against the accused are groundless and he has to do so after recording reasons. The Lower Court record has been made available to this Court at the time of hearing of this petiti