M.C. Desai, J.
1. A case under Sections 324 and 506 I. P. C. was instituted by the opposite party No. 1 against the applicant. When the applicant appeared in court he applied to the Magistrate for acquittal on the ground that the offence had been compromised at home. The application was not accepted by the Magistrate and he proceeded to record the evidence of the complainant and on 5-2-1958 framed a charge under Section 323 I. P. C. which is cornpoundable.
Then the case was transferred to another court where the applicant applied again for acquittal onthe ground of the compromise. The Magistrate refused to go at once into the question whether the offence had been compounded or not and said that he would proceed with the trial and decide the question at the end of the trial.
2. It is not understood why the Magistrate refused to decide at once the question whether there has been any compromise or not. Though tha prosecution was for the offences of Sections 324 and 508 since only a charge under Section 323 has- been framed against the applicant I take it that the offence alleged to have been committed by him is that of Section 323 I. P. C, only. As soon as that offence was compounded with him by opposite party No. 1 he became entitled to be acquitted.
It is laid down in Section 345 (6) Cr. P. C. that the composition of an offence has the effect of acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. The effect is automatic. Wherever composition of an offence takes place it has instantaneous effect of acquittal of the accused. Once the accused is acquitted he cannot be tried again for the same offence, vide Section 403 of the Code. When it was contended before the Magistrate that the applicant stood acquitted on account of composition of the offence, it meant that his trial was barred by Section 403 Cr. P. C. and it was the duty of the Magistrate to decide the matter at once.
The Magistrate was, therefore, bound to decide the question of the composition of the offence as soon as it was raised and he had no jurisdiction to defer it till the end of the trial. He could not proceed with the trial if it was barred by Section 403 Cr. P. C. If it was contended before him that the trial was barred he could proceed with it only after overruling the contention. Consequently in the present case the Magistrate could not proceed with the trial unless he decided that there was no composition.
3. I allow the application, set aside the orderof the Magistrate dated 11-3-1958 and direct himto decide the question whether the offence of Section 323 has been compounded with the applicantby the injured persons or not.