PANIGRAHI, C. J.

( 1 ) THE two petitioners have been convicted under Section 188, I. P. C. Petitioner no. 1, Makardhwaj has, in addition, been convicted under Section 353, I. P. C. The prosecution case is that P. W. 1 the Forester along with P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 two forest Guards, went to the house of one Kalandi for making a search of his house, armed with a search warrant from the Divisional Forest Officer, on 4-3-1953. It is said that the two petitioners did not allow them to enter into the courtyard saying that they would not allow any search. Petitioner Makardhwaj is alleged to have asked them to get away and pushed back the two forest guards. On these facts the petitioners were charged and convicted of having committed an offence under sections 186 and 353, I. P. C.

( 2 ) IN revision Mr. Sahu raised a very interesting point of law and urged that the prosecution has not been validly instituted. It appears that the Forester reported to the Divisional Forest Officer who, in his turn, reported to the Police, and the police, in their turn, after investigation charge-sheeted the accused persons. Reliance is placed on Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code which lays down that