Motaherali Jamadar And Others v. Eshaque Sikdar Opposite Party.

1. We make the Rule absolute upon the third ground stated in the petition.

2. The Magistrate in his explanation eon tends that he is under no obligation to write a judgment and that it is sufficient for him in section 145 proceedings merely to make an order. In the order before us, there is nothing to show how the Magistrate had approached the question or how he has considered the evidence which was before him and as stated in the case of Bhuban Chandra Hazra v. Nibaran Chandra Santra(1), we think that we are entitled in S. 145 proceeding to require from the trying Magistrate a statement of the reasons for his decision sufficient to enable us to determine whether he has or has not complied with sub-section (4) to section 145 and whether he has directed his mind to the consideration of the effect, the evidence adduced. We, therefore, follow the order which was made in the case to which we have already referred and direct that the case be re-opened at the point reached on the date of the order and that after hearing the parties afresh and recording a statement of reasons for his decision such as we have indicated the Magistrate shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law and in making the Rule absolute we send the matter back in order that it may be disposed of in the manner we have indicated.

3. Case remanded.