Koshi, J.

1A. This Criminal revision raises two questions regarding an order under S.113(3), Travancore Criminal P.C. One is whether the order was made prematurely or without jurisdiction in that it was passed before the order under S. 108 was read and explained to the persons sought to be proceeded against and the other is whether in substance or in form the order complies with the requirements of the sub-section.

2A. The records of the case which have been called for do not show that the preliminary order was read or explained to the present petitioner or to the other counter-petitioners in the case before the order under S.113(3) was passed. Decided cases show that the Court cannot pass an order under the said sub-section until after the enquiry is commenced as envisaged by sub-s. L See Criminal Proceedings No. 444 of 1122 dated 26.6.1122 of the High Court of Travancore in Criminal. Revision Petitions 112 and 126 to 134 of 1122 and the decisions in Emperor v. Sidik Ghulam Hyder Chandio (AIR 1943 Sind 163) and Emperor v. Yusuf Jumo (AIR 1943 Sind 175).

3A. As for the second point all that the Magistrate has said is that for the reasons stated in the police report dated 1