Chief Presidency Magistrate, while endorsing warrant under Section 387 Criminal Procedure Code, is acting as a Court and not as persona designata.

ORDER :- This petition is filed under Section 561-A Criminal Procedure Code to call for the warrant issued in S. T. 336 of 1960 on the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam, which was endorsed by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras, for execution and for return of the same to the Court of issue. The petitioner alleged that he was convicted of an offence under the provisions of the Kerala Sales Tax Act for default of payment of sales tax by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-. The arrears of sales tax due, a sum of Rs. 6000/- was also directed to be collected as fine. A warrant was issued by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam, addressed to the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras for the purpose of endorsing the warrant under the provisions of Section 387 Criminal Procedure Code and for execution. The warrant was endorsed by the Chief Presidency Magistrate and forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Madras for execution. The petitioner moved the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras for return of the warrant on the ground that the warrant was not executable. The learned Chief Presidency Magistrate dismissed the petition holding that he had already sent the warrant for execution to the Commissioner of police and therefore had become functus officio. He also held that the Court of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Kerala was competent to issue a distress warrant under Section 386 Criminal Procedure Code.

2. According to the petitioner, the warrant is illegal as it is not in conformity with Section 386(1) Criminal Procedure Code. He submitted that he had already paid the fine imposed by the Court and that the warrant issued for the collection of the sales tax is not legal. He further submitted that as the warrant is issued under Section 386(1) Criminal Procedure Code, it cannot be transmitted outside the jurisdiction of the Kerala State, for, according to him, the provisions of the Kerala Sales Tax Act can have validity only within the territorial limits of the State and they cannot have any extra territorial application, and the procedure relating to the recovery of the tax could operate only within the State of Kerala.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Chief Presidency Magistrate, who endorsed the warrant, is not an inferior criminal court under Section 435 Criminal Procedure Code and therefore his order is not revisable under Section 439 Criminal Procedure Code. Notice was issued to the Government Pleader when the case came up for hearing at the first instance and the Government Pleader submitted that the Kerala State Sales Tax Act providing that the arrears of tax shall be collected as fine is perfectly valid and is executable even outside the Kerala State under Sections 386 and 387 Criminal Procedure Code. It is unnecessary to consider the contention of the Government Pleader in this petition.

4. Section 386 Criminal Procedure Code provides that where an offender has been sentenced to pay a fine the Court passing the sentence may take action for the recovery of the fine by issuing a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any moveable property belonging to the offender. A warrant thus issued by any Court may be executed under Section 386 Criminal Procedure Code within the local limits of jurisdiction of such Court. The Court may also authorise the attachment and sale of any such property without such limits when endorsed by the District Magistrate or the Chief Presidency Magistrate within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such property is found. The contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that when the Chief Presidency Magistrate endorses the warrant received by him from outside for execution, he is not acting as a Court. The Criminal Rules of practice provide for the execution of warrants under Sections 386 and 387, Criminal Procedure Code. Sub-rule (7) to Rule 290-A provides