Thakur Sahu and Others vs Emperor

James, J.—This is an application for revision of the order of the Joint Magistrate of Bhagalpur, summarily dismissing the petitioners'' appeal from a conviction u/s 504, Criminal P.C., without recording any reason for his order.

The explanation of the learned Joint Magistrate is that when an appeal is summarily dismissed u/s 421, Criminal P.C. it is not necessary to deliver a formal judgment in accordance with the provisions of Section 367. This is true, but the learned Joint Magistrate should have remembered that, as was pointed out in Gurubari Behera v. Emperor [1917] 2 Pat. 695, a Magistrate who summarily dismisses an appeal u/s 421 without giving reasons runs the risk of having the case remanded for a further hearing, if the High Court in revision is not satisfied that he had properly applied his mind to the case. A Sessions Judge or Magistrate, whose orders are subject to revision by the High Court, ought, save in very exceptional cases, to give soma reasons for his decision which will show that he had really considered the points raised by the appellant and that the appeal actually is without foundation.

If the appellate Court decides after hearing the appellant''s pleader that there is no merit in the appeal, the position amounts to this, that the Court feels able to pronounce judgment at once without calling upon the other side for a reply; and when the Court is thus able immediately to pronounce judgment, the reasons for the decision should be given, just as they would be given if on the hearing of the appeal after admission, the Court should find it unnecessary to call upon the Public Prosecutor to reply to the arguments adduced on behalf of the appellant. This is the manner in which Sessions Judges ordinarily apply the provisions of Section 421 to appeals which are presented in Court by a pleader; and it is only in very exceptional cases that an order summarily dismissing an appeal without giving reasons can be justified.

The appeal with which I am here concerned necessarily involves the consideration of conflicting evidence and I am not satisfied that the learned Joint Magistrate has really applied his mind to the question of whether on a consideration of the evidence as a whole the conviction was justified. The order of the lower appellate Court is accordingly set aside and the appeal is remanded to the District Magistrate of Bhagalpur for re-hearing, either by himself or by any other Magistrate specially empowered u/s 407(2), Criminal P.C.