Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Based on the Final Report, the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences under 2025:KER:19421 Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 472 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused and numbered the case as C.C.No.110 of 2005. All the accused appeared before the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

5. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, as per order dated 20.12.2005 in Crl.M.P.No.3302/2005, tendered pardon under Section 306 Cr.P.C. to accused Nos.7 and 8. Committal

Challenge on the committal under Section 306(5) Cr.P.C.

22. The petitioner submits that the Chief Judicial Magistrate ought not have committed the case to the Sessions Court. As I mentioned above, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate tendered pardon to accused Nos. 7 2025:KER:19421 and 8, and they accepted the same. Where a person has accepted a tender of pardon, and he has been examined, if the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence is the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he has to commit the case for trial to the Sessions Court. This is the mandate of Section 306(5) Cr.P.C.

23. Section 306 Cr.P.C. reads thus:-

"306.Tender of pardon to accomplice.-

(1) With a view to obtaining the evidence of any person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to an offence to which this section applies, the Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate at any stage of the investigation or inquiry into, or the trial of, the offence, and the Magistrate of the first class inquiring into or trying the offence, at any stage of the inquiry or trial, may tender a pardon to such person on condition of his making a full and true disclosure of the whole of the circumstances within his knowledge relative to the offence and to every other person concerned, whether as principal or abettor, in the commission thereof.

24. Sub-section (5) of Section 306 Cr.P.C. makes it clear that where a person has accepted a tender of pardon under sub-section (1) and has been examined under sub-section (4), if the Magistrate taking cognizance is the Chief Judicial Magistrate, irrespective of whether the offence is exclusively triable by a Sessions Court or not it shall commit it to the Sessions Court. Therefore, there is no irregularity in the committal of the case to the Sessions Court.