This is a recommendation by the District Magistrate, Sialkot, to set aside the acquittal of Rahim Bakhsh and seven others from charges under sections 427/149. 447/149 and 143 of the Pakistan Penal Code.
2. The case arose out of a complained filed by Muhammad Hussain who alleged that the accused had trespassed into the land which was in leis possession and had damaged his bajra crop which was valued at Rs.
70. The case was tried by the Tehsildar Shakkargarh who had the powers of second class Magistrate. He heard the case under the summons case procedure and ultimately acquitted the accused.
3. The District Magistrate has sent this case to this Court for setting aside the order of acquittal on the grounds firstly, 'that section 427, P. P. C. Is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years' rigorous imprisonment or with fine or with both, and the case should have been tried as a warrant case and, secondly, that the statements of .The accused under section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were not recorded and the trial is vitiated also on that account.
4. Sayed Amir Ali who appears for the complainant in this case said that apart from the commission of these irregularities, the learned Magistrate did not take a reasonable view of the evidence and the judgment of acquittal has, therefore, resulted in gross miscarriage of justice.
5. It is true that the learned Magistrate adopted summon, case procedure in this case and the trial is, therefore, vitiated on that account. It is also true that no statements under sec--tion 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been recorded. The prejudice for both these illegalities was caused to the accused who have been acquitted, but they have naturally ho made any grievance of that fact.
6. The contention of Mr. Amir Ali, that the evidence was not properly appreciated by the learned Magistrate, has some force. I find that the learned Magistrate in dealing with this case did not, at all, refer to the documentary evidence which 'was placed on record in the shape of khasra girdawris. Any observation, however, on my part with regard to the merits of the case may amount to a direction to convict. I, therefore, refrain from expressing any opinion on this aspect of the case.
7. This revision petition was admitted to a hearing in January 1964, and more than five years have passed by. The case is of a trivial nature. I am not inclined to order a retrial for the reasons given above. The revision petition is dismissed.