JUDGMENT Stevens, J. - The Petitioner was convicted under sec. 193 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of two contradictory statements, one of which is said to have been made by him in the course of his examination on his complaint under sec. 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the other in the course of his subsequent examination as a witness. This rule was issued to show cause why the conviction and sentence should not be set aside on the ground that the record of the complainant's examination made under sec. 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not signed by the complainant. In showing cause, the Magistrate has submitted that the defect is cured by sec. 537 of the Code. 2. It seems to us that there is this difficulty in the case that the only evidence as to what was said by the Petitioner in his examination on his complaint is contained in the record of that examination made by the Joint Magistrate. The law requires that that record shall be made in a particular way, that is, that the substance of the examination shall be reduced to writing and that it shall be signed by the complainant, and also by the Magistrate. That being so, if the record has not been made in accordance with the law, it appears to us that it cannot be used as evidence of the statement made by the complainant. 3. There is no provision with regard to complaints analogous to that contained in sec. 533 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with reference to confessions or other statements of an accused person: but in any case assuming that the statements made by the complainant in his examination could be proved otherwise than by the record of his examination on oath, there is no such proof on the record of this case. It seems to us that there is nothing in the provisions of sec. 537 of the Code that has any application to the matter. As the case stands then, there is no legal proof before us of the particular statements made by the Petitioner as complainant, and as he has been convicted on alternative charges, and not on proof of the falsity of the statements which have been made by him in giving his evidence at the trial, the conviction cannot be maintained. As the case stands then, there is no legal proof before us of the particular statements made by the Petitioner as complainant, and as he has been convicted on alternative charges, and not on proof of the falsity of the statements which have been made by him in giving his evidence at the trial, the conviction cannot be maintained. The rule is therefore made absolute and the conviction and sentence are set aside, the Petitioner will be released from his bail, and the fine, if realized, or so much thereof as may have been realized, will be refunded.