Horwill, J.

1. The respondent had built a house with a verandah; and he received notice from the President of the District Board to remove the front portion of it, the notice alleging that that portion was an encroachment on the public road. He failed to comply with the notice and so was prosecuted. The President examined the Local Fund Survey Maistry and the local Karnam as P.Ws. 1 and 2; but did not file any of the survey records or any other documents in proof of the encroachment. The Sub-Magis-trate felt that the evidence was rather weak, but finally found the accused not guilty on the ground that the dispute was of a civil nature. The Crown has appealed against the acquittal of the respondent. It is needless to say that the Sub-Magistrate ought not to have disposed of this case on the ground that he has. There may be a bona fide dispute between the District Board and the accused about the ownership of the land; but the Magistrate cannot avoid his responsibility to go into that question and decide the dispute to the best of his ability. Any case launched under these provisions of the Local Boards Act is necessarily of a civil nature; for the Court has to decide whether t