H.C.P. Tripathi, J. - (1.) These revisions are directed against the order of Sri Jagvir Singh, Extra Magistrate, Mirzapur passed on 21st June 1969 in three Criminal Gases u/Ss. 185 /307 of the Municipalities Act, acquitting the accused u/S. 247 of the CrPC. On 31st July 1968, the Executive Officer Municipal Board Mirzapur reported to the Tahsildar Sadar that the then Resident Engineer of the Electric Supply Company Ltd., Mirzapur had erected some unauthorised constructions within the compound of the Power House, has disregarded the notice issued to him in this regard by the Municipal Board and has thereby committed an offence u/S. 185 /307 of the Municipalities Act. It was prayed in this report that a case be registered against him and he should be convicted and sentenced for the offence committed by him, and the informant be informed of the date fixed in the case, so that he may produce his evidence. In this report the names of the witnesses for the informant had also been given.
(2.) On receipt of this report a case was registered against the opposite party and summonses were issued to him by the Tahsildar. Later on, under the direction of the District Magistrate the case was transferred to the Court of Sri Jagvir Singh for disposal who dismissed it as has been stated above. Learned counsel for the revisionist has argued that as the Magistrate had taken cognizance u/S. 190(1)(c) of the Code, S. 247 was not applicable and the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to dismiss the case in the absence of the complainant. Learned counsel contends that it was not a complaint within the meaning of the CrPC on which the cognizance has been taken and, therefore, the trial Magistrate has erred in acquitting the accused in default of appearance of the Agent of the Municipal Board on the date fixed in the case. Reliance is placed on the case of Mst. Basanti v/s. Maqsud Ali Khan ( : AIR 1924 Alld. 528) and also on the case of State of UP v/s. Ramjani ( : 1965 AWR 833).
(3.) The only question which arises in the case is whether the information sent by the Municipal Board amounted to a complaint within the meaning of the CrPC or it was only an information as envisaged u/S. 190(1)(c) of the Code.;