P.N. Harkauli, J. - (1.) THIS application for revision arises in the following circumstances.
(2.) THE applicant was prosecuted under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act on the allegation that the two R. Rs. which were stolen were found in his possession. THE applicant's version appears to be that he had purchased these R. Rs. bona fide from other persons and, thus, he was not guilty. The learned counsel for the applicant says that while applicant's trial was in progress the police made a report that two other persons named Brij Bhushan and Ram Ayodhya Singh, who had sold the R. Rs. in question to the applicant had been arrested. Thereupon the applicant moved an application before the learned Magistrate that Brij Bhushan and Ram Ayodhya may also be summoned by the learned Magistrate under Section 190 (1) (a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, The learned Magistrate rejected this prayer observing as follows : "It may be the defence of the accused that he had purchased these R. Rs. from other persons, but that does not necessarily mean that those persons should also be made accused along with this accused because in this way there will be no end to this chain and only at the instance of the accused so many persons shall have to be implicated as accused for no good reason." Against this order of the learned Magistrate the applicant preferred a revision before the Addl. District Magistrate (J), which was dismissed by the learned Addl. District Magistrate (Judicial).
(3.) THEREUPON the present application for revision was moved. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I am clearly of the opinion that this application is without any merit. The prayer of the applicant virtually amounts to this that he purchased the R. Rs. bona fide and he is not guilty and that the real culprits are Brij Bhushan and Ram Ayodhya Singh, and they should be summoned and proceeded against by the Magistrate. This is clearly not permissible. If it is correct that the police has been able to lay its hand on the real culprits and the applicant is innocent, then as far as I can see, only two courses are open to the applicant viz., that he should either go ahead with trial and prove his innocence or, may be, to move for quashing of the proceedings. In any case, it appears to me to be clear that the request that Brij Bhushan and Ram Ayodhya Singh should be summoned and tried as accused in this case is totally untenable.;