Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Learned counsel appearing for the original Complainant invited our attention to several provisions of the said Code which show that the Legislature has treated the Judicial Magistrates, First Class differently from the Metropolitan Magistrates. He invited our attention to section 281 of the said Code. He also invited our attention to Section 355 of the said Code which makes a separate provision as ash 8 wp-2903.11 regards the judgments of the learned Metropolitan Magistrates. He, therefore, submitted that the Metropolitan Magistrates form a separate class which is distinct from the class of Judicial Magistrates, First Class.

18. Perusal of the provisions of the said Code shows that there are four classes of Magistrates under the said Code. There are Metropolitan Magistrates, Judicial Magistrates of the First Class, Judicial Magistrates of the Second Class and the Executive Magistrates.

It is true that under Section 6 of the said Code which provides for classes of criminal Courts, Judicial Magistrates of First Class and Metropolitan Magistrates in Metropolitan area are together placed in the second category. The Metropolitan areas have been defined under ash 17 wp-2903.11 Section 8 of the said Code. Sub-section (2) thereof provides that the Presidency-towns of Bombay, Culcutta and Madras and the city of Ahmedabad shall be deemed to be declared under Sub-section (1) to be a metropolitan areas. Sub-section (1) provides that the State Government may, by notification, declare that any area in the State comprising a city or town, the population of which exceeds one million to be a metropolitan area. Thus, a Metropolitan Magistrate can be appointed in a metropolitan area which is a separate and distinct area from the other parts of the State. At this stage, it will be also necessary to look into the provisions of Chapter XXVII of the said Code which deal with the judgments. Sections 353 and 354 are general provisions dealing with the judgments by criminal Courts. However, Section 355 makes a special provision which carves out an exception to Sections 353 and 354 in case of Metropolitan Magistrates. The Section lays down what particulars shall be recorded in the judgment. It will be also necessary to make a reference to Section 395 of the said Code.

Sub-section (1) lays down that if any Court is satisfied that a case involves the questions of the nature specified in Sub-section (1) thereof, the Court is empowered to make a reference to this Court. However, Sub-section (2) provides that even when the provisions of Sub-section (1) do not apply ,a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Court of Sessions is entitled to refer a case for decision of this Court on any question of law arising in such a case. Section 404 of the said Code makes a special ash 18 wp-2903.11 provision which applies when the High Court or the Court of Sessions calls for record of any trial held by a Metropolitan Magistrate. It provides that in such a case, the Metropolitan Magistrate will submit with the record a statement setting forth the grounds of his decision or order and any facts which he thinks material to the issue and the Revisional Court shall consider the said statement before overruling or setting aside the said decision. This provision is required to be enacted because of the special provision regarding judgment contained in Section 355 of the said Code. Section 354 of the said Code specifically provides that every judgment shall contain points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. In view of Section 355 of the said Code, Section 354 will not apply to a judgment of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. Clause (i) of Section 355 provides that in all cases in which an appeal lies from the final order either under Section 373 or under sub-section (3) of Section 374, a brief statement of the reasons for the decision shall be incorporated in the Judgment. Thus, Section 355 makes a major departure from the provisions relating to the judgment which apply to all the Courts including the Courts of Judicial Magistrates of First Class. Thus, it appears from the scheme of the said Code that the Metropolitan Magistrates in metropolitan area and the Judicial Magistrates of First Class in other parts of the State may be exercising the same jurisdiction or powers, but under different provisions of the said Code, the ash 19 wp-2903.11 Metropolitan Magistrates have been treated separately and distinctly from the Judicial Magistrates of First Class.