JUDGMENT : Aikman, J. In this case six accused were sent up for trial by the police, charged with rioting and with committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The Magistrate before whom the case came wrote a long order, or as he calls it, a judgment reviewing the evidence, and in the result discharged all the accused. On the complainant's application, the learned Sessions Judge acting under the provisions of section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ordered that the accused should be committed for trial. This is an application in revision asking us to set aside the order made by the Sessions Judge under section 436. 2. As to the functions of a Magistrate who is holding an inquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure into cases triable by the Court of Session or by the High Court, I am of opinion that he is empowered not only to consider whether the evidence for the prosecution, if true, furnishes sufficient grounds for committing the accused for trial, but that he can go further and weigh that evidence, that is, that he can consider whether it is true. If he arrives at the conclusion either at the close of the case for the prosecution or after hearing the accused's witnesses, that it is not true, he can give effect to his opinion by discharging the accused. This is clear from the addition made to section 213 by the present Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. By sub-section 2 of that section, as ft now stands, the Magistrate is empowered, after hearing witnesses for the defence, to cancel the charge which he had framed under section 210, that is a charge framed when at the close of the case for the prosecution the Magistrate was satisfied that there were sufficient grounds for committing (vide section 210). No doubt this gives large powers to officers, it may be of only a few years' experience, in dealing with serious charges. But the law has provided a safe-guard in section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whereby a District Magistrate or a Court of Session can set aside an order of discharge passed by a Magistrate holding an inquiry tinder Chapter XVIII. But the law has provided a safe-guard in section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whereby a District Magistrate or a Court of Session can set aside an order of discharge passed by a Magistrate holding an inquiry tinder Chapter XVIII. Although a Magistrate has this large power of discharging the accused, he should, in my judgment, only exercise it when he is clearly of opinion that the evidence for the prosecution is untrustworthy. If it is a matter of weighing probabilities, he would, I consider, be well advised in leaving the case to the Court which alone is empowered to try it, and he should not, as in the case referred to by my learned colleague, discharge the accused because in his opinion the accused “ought to have the benefit of the doubt.” 4. In the case we are dealing with, I think it sufficient to say that after reading the judgment of the Magistrate, I am of opinion that the learned Sessions Judge was right in taking action under section 436. I would therefore refuse this application.