- (1.) These two petitions are against the conviction of the same accused in two different cases one against a Conviction under section 7O-B of the City Police Act and another against a conviction under section 71 of the said Act by the First class Magistrate Bench Court at Hyderabad in C.C. Nos. 2254 and 2807 of 1969 respectively.
(2.) The only point urged in these revisions by Mr. Hasan and Mr. Dixit the learned Counsel is that the offences under above provisions, for which the accused were convicted are non-cognizable offences that under section 155 (2) Criminal Procedure Code no police officer should investigate a non-cognizable offence without the order of a Magistrate of the 1st or second class having power to try such case or commit the same for trial and as no such order had been obtained in these two cases, the filing of the charge-sheets by the police is bad and the entire trial is vitiated.
(3.) Section 4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, read as follows :- Cognizable offence means an offence for and 'cognizable case' means a case in which a police-officer, within or without the presidency-towns may in accordance with the second schedule or under any law for the time being in force arrest without warrant". It is now contended that at the bottom of Schedule II in the Criminal Procedure Code, it is shown that with regard to offences under other laws, if the offence is one punishable with imprisonment for less than one year, the accused concerned shall not be arrested without a warrant and as the offences with which the accused had been charged in this case being those under sections 70 and 71 of the City Police Act punishable only with a maximum sentence of imprisonment of 8 days or fine in the case of section 70 and only with a fine in the case of section 71, are not cognizable offences and as such the provisions of section 155 (2) have to be strictly complied with and as there has been no such compliance in so far as the sanction of the Magistrate has not been obtained the trial is vitiated.;