the matter which had been remanded back to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to hold a further enquiry where the direction did not necessarily oblige the Magistrate to record any further evidence in the case. The nature of the inquiry was in the discretion of the Magistrate which may or may not have included recording of further evidence on behalf of the complainant. The Magistrate without recording any further evidence in the matter could have reappraised the averments made in the complaint and the material already on record to determine whether a prima facie case was made out against the accused persons.
Magistrate in the instant case summoned the witnesses and examined them afresh. He may have gone beyond what was legally necessary to do but that is no reason to hold that the recording of evidence by the Magistrate as a part of the further enquiry directed by the High Court would vitiate the proceedings before him or the conclusion drawn on the basis of any such enquiry. So long as the Magistrate was satisfied that a prima facie case had been made out, he was competent to issue summons to the accused. And all the rest alleged error sought to be pointed out by the Appellant was not of a kind that would persuade to interfere with the proceedings.
