B.R Arora, J.:— This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated July 6, 1992, passed by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Deedwana, by which the learned Magistrate observed that the Court has no jurisdiction in the matter. The learned Magistrate sent the case to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for sending it to the competent Court having the jurisdiction as he himself had no jurisdiction in the matter.
2. Madan Lal and Smt. Shyama filed a complaint against the present petitioners in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Deedwana, for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 495, and 120-B I.P.C The learned Magistrate, by his order dated May 18, 1987, took cognizance against the petitioners. Dissatisfied with the order, passed by the learned Magistrate taking cognizance, the petitioners preferred a revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Merta, which has partly allowed and the matter was remanded to the learned Magistrate for deciding the question of jurisdiction as the first question, if any application is moved by the accused in this connection. After the remand of the case, the petitioners moved an application on June 19, 1989, challenging the jurisdiction of the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana. This application was dismissed by the learned Magistrate. The petitioners approached this Court and this Court, vide its order dated November 19, 1991, directed the learned Magistrate to allow both the parties to lead their evidence and to decide the question of jurisdiction within the period of eight months from the date of submission of the copy of the order. The complainant did not lead any evidence on the point of jurisdiction, but moved an application under Section 322 Cr. P.C on May 27, 1992, informing the Court that the Court has no jurisdiction and therefore, the matter may be referred to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to send it to the competent Court having the jurisdiction. This application was, also, opposed by the accused and it was stated that the provisions of Section 322 Cr. P.C are not applicable in the present case, rather the provisions of Section 201 Cr. P.C are applicable and, therefore, the complaint should be returned to the complainant for presenting the same before the Court having the jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate disallowed the objections raised by the accused and by his order dated July 6, 1992, referred the case to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for sending it to the competent Criminal Court. It is against this order that the present miscellaneous petition has been filed.
3. Section 201 Cr. P.C provides that if a complaint is made to the Magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance of the offences, he shall return it for presentation to the proper Court with an endorsement to this effect. Section 322 Cr. P.C deals with the cases where in the course of enquiry or trial, it appears to the Magistrate that he has no jurisdiction to try the case or that the case is one which should be tried by soma other Magistrate of the district or that the case should be tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, then in that circumstance he shall stay the proceedings and submit the case to the Court with a brief report explaining its nature to the Chief Judicial Magistrate or to such other Magistrate having the jurisdiction as the Chief Judicial Magistrate so directs. These provisions of Section 322 Cr. P.C are applicable only in those cases where initially the Court has jurisdiction, but during the course of inquiry or trial, the Magistrate finds that he is not competent to try the case and the case is to be tried by some other Magistrate where the Court initially had no jurisdiction then on these cases, Section 201 Cr. P.C covers, the field and not Section 322 Cr. P.C The same view has been taken by this Court and in the case of Rakesh v. the State of Rajasthan (I), wherein the Court has observed as under:—
“I will be clear from the perusal of s. 322 and s. 201 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, that the former section will only apply when the Magistrate has initially jurisdiction and in the course of an inquiry into an offence or trial from the evidence it appears to him to warrant a presumption that he has either no jurisdiction or the case is one which should not be tried by him or should be committed for trial or should be tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate that he has to stay the proceedings and submits the case with his report explaining its nature to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Chief Judicial Magistrate either should try the case himself or should send the case to any Magistrate subordinate to him having jurisdiction. In case the Magistrate has initially no jurisdiction or is not competent to take cognizance of the offence, Section 322 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will not be attracted and in such a case the only course open will be to return the complaint under Section 201 Cr. P.C to the complainant for presentation to the proper Court.”
In the present case though initially the complaint was filed in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana, and an objection was taken regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the Court and later on an application was moved on behalf of the complainant that the Court has no jurisdiction to try the present case and the case may be sent to the competent Court having the jurisdiction over it. When the complainant himself has moved an application that the Court has no jurisdiction and no enquiry whatsoever was made by the trial Court and the Court was lacking the jurisdiction initially then it should have returned the complaint to the complainant to be presented before the competent Court having the jurisdiction over it instead of sending it to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate as the provisions of Section 322 Cr. P.C are not applicable in this case and the present case falls within the purview of Section 201 Cr. P.C The order dated July 6, 1992, passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana, sending the case to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, therefore, deserves to be quashed.
4. In the result, I allow this miscellaneous petition, set-aside the order passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana, and direct the learned Magistrate to return the complaint to the complainant under Section 201 Cr. P.C to be presented in the proper Court having the jurisdiction.
Comments