JUDGMENT

D.N. Roy, J. - In a summary trial the applicant Noora was convicted by a Magistrate u/s 456, I.P.C. and sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment. In appeal the learned Addl. Sessions Judge altered the conviction to one u/s 447, I.P.C. and maintained the sentence. As against that order Noora has come up in revision to this Court and the only ground that has been passed on his behalf is that the offence u/s 447, I.P.C. having been exclusively triable by the Panchayati Adalat, the appellate court should have ordered the case to be transferred and tried de-novo by the Panchayati Adalat.

2. The facts found were these. On the night between the 30th and 31st of May, 1953, the applicant had entered into the gher of Ajaib Singh with a view to commit theft of his cattle. Ajaib Singh woke up and he raised and alarm and he chased the applicant with the help of some others and arrested him. In the morning the applicant was taken to the police station where a report was lodged. The applicant's plea that at about 4 in the night he had gone out to ease himself and when he was passing by the side of Bitora he was chased and arrested by Ajaib Singh with other persons, was not accepted.

3. Section 52 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act of 1947; (Act XXVI of 1947), as amended by Act X of 1950, Act VI of 1952, Act XVIII of 1952 and Act II of 1955, provides that an offence punishable u/s 447, I.P.C. if committed within the jurisdiction of a nyaya panchayat shall be cognisable by such nyaya panchayat. The various other offences cognisable by the nyaya panchayat as enumerated in Section 52 of the Act did not, however, cover the offence punishable u/s 456, I.P.C. under which the applicant was charged by the Magistrate and under which he had been convicted by the Magistrate on 20-10-1953. Prior to the passing of the Amending Act (No. II of 1955) Section 55 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act read as follows:

No Court shall take cognisance of a case...which is cognisable under the Act by a Panchayati Adalat unless an order has been passed by a sub-Divisional Magistrate...Under Section 85.

4. Then followed Section 56 which provided:

If at any stage of proceedings in a criminal case pending before a Magistrate it appears that the case is triable by a Panchayati Adalat, he shall at once transfer the case to the Panchayati Adalat which shall try the case de novo.

5. The question arose, when these sections stood unamended, as to whether the High Court could pass orders transferring a case pending before a Court of Bench Magistrates to the Panchayati Adalat in relation to a charge exclusively cognisable by the Panchayati Adalat within the powers conferred by Section 56 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, and it was decided by this Court in Abdul Aziz v. State 1950 A.W.R. (H.C.) 529 that the power conferred by Section 56 was a power to be exercised by the Magistrate before whom the case is pending and it was not a power which could be exercised by any other Court, and the High Court not pass orders transferring the case u/s 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure because that section did not provide for the same, but the Court could, in view of the powers of superintendence conferred on it by Sub-clause (1) of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, give directions to the Bench Magistrates to act in a manner justified by law. In that case therefore a direction was given to the Bench Magistrates to transfer the case u/s 323, I.P.C. to the Panchayati Adalat having jurisdiction over it.

6. Sections 55 and 56 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act have been considerably amended by the subsequent Acts and by Act No. 11 of 1955. The amended sections reads as follows:-

55(1). After a nyaya panchayat has been established for any area, no court, except as otherwise provided in this Act, shall take cognisance of any case triable by such nyaya panchayat.

(2) ....

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52 and in Sub-section (1) of this section any Court may take cognisance of any