Baldeo Singh and Another vs Mt. Dheno Goalin

Rowland, J.—The two petitioners were convicted u/s 352, I.P.C. of assault on Mt. Dheno Goalin and each of them was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25 each. They appealed and the Magistrate having first class powers passed an order dismissing the appeal summarily, but at the same time altering the conviction of Baldeo Singh from Section 352 to Section 352 read with Section 114 of the Code. The appellate order is dated 7th August 1935, and this application in revision was presented on 8th November 1935. In accordance with the practice of this Court applications in revision are not usually entertained unless presented within sixty days of the order appealed against. In the facts of this case there is nothing of special importance and no particular reason for departing from the usual practice. But it is necessary to point out to the Magistrate that it is illegal at the same time to dismiss an appeal summarily and to modify the order appealed from. This has been pointed out in Dahu Raut v. Emperor 1935 PC 89. In the present case the Magistrate might well have let the order of the lower Court stand because when any person, who is absent would be liable to be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence is committed, he is to be deemed u/s 114, I.P.C. to have committed the act or offence. That is to say there was not in fact any error on the part of the first Court in convicting u/s 352. "With these observations the rule is discharged.