In Re: Akbar Momin

We think the conviction of the Petitioner Akbar in this case under sec. 352, I. P. C., was irregular and cannot be sustained in law. The original charge winch he was called upon to answer was one under sec. 353, I. P. C., for having assaulted a police-officer in the discharge of his duties. It was found in the course of the trial that Akbar had committed no such assault but a witness in the case named Panchu deposed that he haft been assaulted by Akbar and, on this, the Magistrate convicted Akbar under sec. 352, I. P. C. There has been no complaint by Panchu of an assault upon him and the Deputy Magistrate in his letter of explanation states that he is empowered to take cognizance of offences under sec. 190, cl. (c). If so, he was bound to take further proceedings under sec. 191, Cr. P. C. This was not done and, inasmuch as the charge, which Akbar was originally called upon to answer was not proved against him, we think that his conviction for an assault upon a witness cannot be upheld. We accordingly set aside the conviction and the order binding him down to keep the peace and direct his release.