@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
A.H. Khan, J.
The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that the complainant filed a complaint in the Court of the Magistrate, First Class, Lahar, u/s 427 of
the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the accused had cut the crop standing in his field and that they also let loose their cattle in the fields of the
complainant, causing damage to the tune of Rs. 200. This case was tried by the learned Magistrate summarily. He recorded the statement of the
complainant and one of his witnesses, and, also that of a defence witness, but without recording any finding acquitted the accused.
According to Section 263(h) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Magistrate trying a case summarily must record a finding. But no finding has
been recorded in this case. In Janki Rai and Anr. v. Emperor, 51 I. C. 207 the Patna High Court has observed that where there is no discussion
and not even any mention of the evidence of prosecution witnesses, and the Magistrate merely wrote in one sentence that the accused were entitled
to acquittal, it was not a judgment in the eye of law and that the acquittal should be set aside.
It is true that in a summary case, the Magistrate need not write a lengthy judgment but it is indispensably necessary that he should record a finding.
On perusal of the judgment under revision, it appears that although the word ''finding'' is written in the judgment, yet no finding of fact is given. In its
place, only an order acquitting the accused is recorded. This is manifestly in contravention of the direction contained in Section 263 of the Criminal
Procedure Code.
In result, I set aside the order of acquittal and send the case back to the learned trial Court with a direction to record a finding and to proceed
according to law.