Henry Thoby Princep, J.

1. On a complaint made to the Magistrate he convicted one ofthe petitioners, Har Kishore Dass, of mischief and sentenced him to fine. Onapplication made to the Sessions Judge he directed a further inquiry to be madeby the Magistrate into another offence, viz., under Section 144 of the PenalCode in respect of Har Kishore Dass, no charge of any such offence having beenmade at any time against him. The Sessions Judge has also directed a furtherinquiry against other persons who apparently were mentioned in the complaint,but who had not been summoned to appear before the Magistrate.

2. In our opinion the order of the Sessions Judge is withoutjurisdiction not being within the power described by Section 437. The complainthad not been dismissed under Section 203 or Sub-section (3), of Section 204 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure, inasmuch as on that complaint Har Kishore Dasshad been convicted, nor was this a case in which any accused person had beendischarged, because Har Kishore Dass had never been tried for any offenceexcept that of mischief, and in regard to the other petitioners, they had neverbeen before the Court at all. It may be that proceedings can be taken againstall these persons. That, however, is a matter for the discretion of theMagistrate, but it is not one, on which the Sessions Judge can under Section437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure direct the Magistrate to proceed. Theorder for further inquiry is accordingly set aside and the rule is madeabsolute.

.

Har Kishore Dass and Ors.vs. Jugul Chunder Kabyarathna Bhuttacharjee (07.02.1900 - CALHC)