Emperor Vs. Shettepa Satapa Mudenavar - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1908), sec, 164-case triable by court of session-third class magistrate recording statement under section 164-contradictory statement before a qualified magistrate in the preliminary enquiry-false evidence-alternative charge-penal code (act xlv of 1860), sections 191, 193.;a third class magistrate not being empowered to commit for trial cannot deal judicially with any stage of the proceedings in a case exclusively triable by a court of session. where the magistrate records a statement under section 164 of the criminal procedure code in a case triable exclusively by a court of sessions the statement is not evidence in a stage of judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 191 and 193 of the indian penal code. a statement so made and contradicted afterwards, before the magistrate having jurisdiction and exercising it in the preliminary enquiry, will not furnish a basis for an alternative charge of giving false evidence in a judicial proceeding.;queen-empress v. bharma (1886) i. l. r. 1 bom. 702, followed. - a third class magistrate not being empowered to commit for trial cannot deal judicially with any stage of the proceedings in a case exclusively triable by a court of session. where the magistrate records a statement under section 164 of the criminal procedure code in a case triable exclusively by a court of sessions the statement is not evidence in a stage of judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 191 and 193 of the indian penal code. a statement so made and contradicted afterwards, before the magistrate having jurisdiction and exercising it in the preliminary enquiry, will not furnish a basis for an alternative charge of giving false evidence in a judicial proceeding.queen-empress v. bharma (1886) i. l. r. 1 bom. 702, followed.order 1. following the full bench ruling in queen-empress v. bharma ilr (1886) 11 bom. 702 the court reverses the conviction and sentence and directs that the accused be set at liberty.

Judgment:
A Third Class Magistrate not being empowered to commit for trial cannot deal judicially with any stage of the proceedings in a case exclusively triable by a Court of Session. Where the Magistrate records a statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions the statement is not evidence in a stage of judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 191 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code. A statement so made and contradicted afterwards, before the Magistrate having jurisdiction and exercising it in the preliminary enquiry, will not furnish a basis for an alternative charge of giving false evidence in a judicial proceeding.

Queen-Empress v. Bharma (1886) I. L. R. 1 Bom. 702, followed.

Order

1. Following the Full Bench ruling in Queen-Empress v. Bharma ILR (1886) 11 Bom. 702 the Court reverses the conviction and sentence and directs that the accused be set at liberty.