1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Writ Petition No.397/2006 Sk. Sarwar Sk. Rajasaheb .. Petitioner vrs State of Maharashtra .. Respondent .......... Mr. Firdos T. Mirza, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. D.M. Kale, APP for the respondent/State. .......... Coram : K. J. Rohee, J Dated : 6 th September, 2006 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the respondent/State. 2. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant Crime No. 94/2002 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code was registered at P.S. Mangrulpir, District – Washim. After completion of investigation chargesheet was filed against nine accused persons. After considering the chargesheet and documents filed with it, the learned Magistrate framed charge on 23/1/2006 for the offence punishable u/s 324 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was thereafter fixed for evidence. In the meanwhile, the prosecution moved an application for committing the case to the Court of Session on the ground that the statements filed with the chargesheet reveal offences punishable under sections 307, 364 and 450 of the Indian Penal Code. After considering the 2 reply filed by the accused persons the learned Magistrate allowed the application (Exh.47) by his order dated 18/4/2006 and passed committal order on 26/4/2006. The said committal order is challenged by the petitioner. 3. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that once the learned Magistrate framed charge under particular sections he cannot go back and cannot pass committal order as it would amount to reviewing his earlier framing of charge. On this ground it was alleged that the impugned committal order needs to be quashed. 4. It may be seen that Section 323 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to commit the case to the Court of Session, if, in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before him, it appears to him at any stage of the proceedings before signing judgment that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Session. 5. In view of this specific provision no fault can be found with the impugned committal order. Thus I find no merit in the petition. The same is dismissed in limine. JUDGE asg