AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devadoss, J.—This is an application to revise the order of discharge by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Tiruvannamalai. The deceased was
almost beaten to death and there were as many as 30 injuries on his person. He made a statement as regards the occurrence. There is a volume of
evidence in the case which if believed would sustain a conviction at least u/s 304 or Section 326, Indian Penal Code. The Sub-Magistrate who
heard the case ought to have committed the accused to the Court of Sessions as in all Sessions cases it is for the Sessions Judge to weigh the
evidence and come to a conclusion. The committing Court has only to see whether there is evidence which if believed would sustain a conviction. It
is not the function of the committing Court to consider the probabilities and the evidence in the case as if it is a trying Court.
A great deal of reliance is placed upon the medical evidence, but I do not want to say anything which might prejudice one side or the other. But
it--appears that the medical evidence is not such as should be accepted without careful investigation of the facts of the case. I think in these
circumstances the order of the Magistrate discharging the accused should be set aside and the accused should be committed to the Court of
Sessions. I, therefore, direct the Magistrate to restore the case to his file and commit the accused to the Court of Sessions. The trial will be held by
the Sessions Judge of Chittor inasmuch as the Sessions Judge of North Arcot has dealt with the case in revision. The Magistrate will release the
accused on bail pending the trial in the Sessions Court.
Bail on the same terms as before.