Subba Rao, J. - (1.) I have perused the judgment prepared by my learned brother Mudholkar, J. I agree that the appeal should be dismissed. But I would prefer to give my own reasons for doing so.
(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal are simple. The appellant is a medical practitioner and during the year 1959 he was acting as Deputy Superintendent, Jahanabad Sub-Divisional Hospital and Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Jahanabad. A criminal case was pending before the Court of the Munsif-Magistrate, First Class Jahanabad, and the two accused therein filed a petition in that Court for releasing them on bail. On October 3, 1959, the learned Munsif-Magistrate called for a report from the said medical officer of his opinion on the health of the said accused. The said officer examined the accused and sent the following report to the Munsif-Magistrate. "Examined accused Ramsewak Dusadh and Ramdeo Dasadh of village Havellipur, P. S. Ghosi, district Gaya, and found that both of them are suffering from Hookworm infections and are anaemic." On October 19, 1959, the learned Munsif-Magistrate made the following order granting bail to the said accused: "In view of the order dated 3-10-1959 a petition signed by Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Jahanabad, is received. In this petition it is mentioned that the accused persons are suffering from Hookworm infection and hence they are anaemic. From the petition it appears that its body portion has been written by somebody else and it is simply signed by Mr. R. Saran Superintendent. It is curious to note that no actual examination report has been attached with this petition. It is an extreme case of carelessness on the part of the Doctor concerned. He ought to have realised that a judicial order would be passed on his actual report and not on his petition. Hence let the copy of this petition and ordersheet be forwarded to the Civil Surgeon, Gaya, for information. It is argued by the lawyer appearing on behalf of the accused that these accused persons are poor and would not be in a position to defend themselves in case they would not be allowed bail. I therefore on considering their poor circumstances and ill health allow them to remain on bail on Rs. 500/- with one surety for the like amount." After making some infructuous attempts though administrative channels to get the said remarks against him expunged, the said medical officer filed a revision petition under Sections 435 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the said order in the High Court of Judicature at Patna. The High Court dismissed the revision petition. Hence the appeal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the remarks made by the learned Munsif-Magistrate were unjustified and groundless and that they would affect the appellant's future official career and, therefore, the High Court should have expunged the said remarks. Learned counsel for the respondents, apart from justifying the remarks, contended that the High Court had no jurisdiction to expunge the remarks from the judgment which had become final.;