' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---The complaint filed by respondent No, 1 has twice been remanded by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge and this petition has arisen out of the second remand order dated 1-11-2010 vide which the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge exercising provisional jurisdiction remanded the case to the trial Court and directed to rectify the procedural irregularities/ illegalities by recording statement of the complainant in the first instance and thereafter to proceed with the matter.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that the learned trial Court had committed an illegality which warranted dismissal of the complaint and further that the learned trial Court being a Magistrate cannot proceed with the trial of an offence falling within the mischief of section 336, P.P.C.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length, we find that admittedly the learned trial Court did not record the statement of the complainant in the first instance, which was a procedural irregularity warranting interference and it did not warrant dismissal of the complaint. So far as the contention that the Magistrate section 30, cannot try an offence under section 336, P.P.C.
Is concerned, the learned High Court had adverted to this aspect and held that in terms of section 30, Cr.P.C., a Magistrate First-Class empowered under section 30, Cr.P.C. Can try all offences except those 'punishable with death. The afore-referred observation/finding has not been found by us to be against the law declared.
4. For what has been discussed above, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave refused.