Tyagi, J.—This is a reference made by the learned District Magistrate, Bikaner, recommending that the order of discharge recorded in favour of the accused on 29.6.62 by the Additional Munsiff-Magistrate, 1st Class, Bikaner may be quashed and a direction be issued that the trial of the accused may proceeded after the framing of a charge under secs. 332/353, Indian Penal Code.

2. Kanhaiyalal complainant is a senior teacher in the Sadul Multi-Purpose Higher Secondary School, Bikaner. Accused Usman Ghani was a student of 10th Class in 1962 in that school. On 12th May, 1962 when the result of the annual examination was to be announced the accused is alleged to have gone to the complainant and threatened him that if the accused failed in Hindi which was his subject then he would be given a beating and he would not reach his home safely. The result was announced on that very day at 5 P.M. and the accused was declared as an unsuccessful candidate at the examination. When the complainant Kanhaiyalal left the school premises for his home, it is said that he was caught by the accused and one other person and that he was given a beating with sticks by both of them. A report of the occurrence was lodged by the Head Master to the police station and after investigation a challan under sec. 332/ 353 IPC against the accused was submitted in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner City. Owing to the partial separation of the judiciary from the executive the case was eventually transferred to the file of the Additional Munsiff-Magistrate First Class, Bikaner, who by his order dated 26th of September, 1962, discharged the accused of offences under sec. 332/353, Indian Penal Court, and ordered that the trial under sec. 323, Indian Penal Code may start. It is against this order of the learned Additional Munsiff-Magistrate First Class Bikaner that a revision was preferred by the complainant in the Court of the District Magistrate, Bikaner, who, after giving hearing to both the parties, has made the present reference.

3. The learned Deputy Government Advocate has supported the reference and it has been opposed by Mr. Ahmed Bux on behalf of Usman Ghani.

4. The learned Munsiff-Magistrate recorded the discharge order on the ground that the Investigation Officer did not place on record any document or information to establish prima facie that at the time when the complainant was belaboured by the accused he was acting in the discharge of his official duty either as an examiner or as an announcer of the result, nor was there any circumstance placed by the prosecution to suggest that it was as a consequence of such an act of the complainant that the accused got enraged and inflicted injuries to the complainant and therefore in his opinion he could not find prima facie case to proceed with the trial for charges under sec. 332/353 I.P.C. In my opinion the learned Magistrate has fallen in to error in arriving at the aforesaid conclusion. The learned Deputy Government Advocate has drawn my attention to certain documents produced by the prosecution before the trial court, the copies whereof are alleged to have been supplied to the accused also, from the perusal of which it is quite clear that the complainant acted as an examiner of Hindi papers of the accused, and also he acted as an announcer of the result. In view of the presence of such documents it was not open for the learned Magistrate to have felt that there was no information on the record to warrant the prosecution of the accused under secs. 332 and 353 IPC. These two documents are (1) application of the complainant submitted to the court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate City, Bikaner, on 14.5.62 alleging that accused Usman Ghani being son of a rich contractor is being shielded by the police, and it is in this application that the fact of his announcing the result on 12th of May, 1962 was mentioned, (2) a letter from the Head Master, Government Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Bikaner to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document