ORDER :- Petition by the accused in C.C. No.34 of 11961 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate, Trivellore, to revise the order of the Sub-Magistrate holding that there is nothing illegal in entertaining and proceeding with the joint complaint filed by the respondents. The learned advocate for the respondents raised a preliminary objection on the strength of the decision in Ramayya v. Venkata, (S) AIR 1956 Andhra 97, that this court has no jurisdiction to interfere in revision when the petitioners have not approached the District Magistrate or Sessions Judge to exercise revisional jurisdiction.

But it is clearly stated in that decision that it should not be understood to lay down the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain revision in the first instance. Further, the decision refers to the practice obtaining in the Madras High Court of entertaining such revisions in cases falling under S.145, Cr.P.C.

Under S.435, Cr.P.C. the High Court or any sessions judge or District Magistrate or any Sub-Divisional Magistrate empowered by the State Government may call for and examine the record of inferior courts. Under Sec.436, Cr.P.C. the said courts can order further enquiry in respect