JUDGMENT D.N. Roy, J. - In a summary trial the applicant Noora was convicted by a Magistrate u/s 456, I.P.C. and sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment. In appeal the learned Addl. Sessions Judge altered the conviction to one u/s 447, I.P.C. and maintained the sentence. As against that order Noora has come up in revision to this Court and the only ground that has been passed on his behalf is that the offence u/s 447, I.P.C. having been exclusively triable by the Panchayati Adalat, the appellate court should have ordered the case to be transferred and tried de-novo by the Panchayati Adalat. 2. The facts found were these. On the night between the 30th and 31st of May, 1953, the applicant had entered into the gher of Ajaib Singh with a view to commit theft of his cattle. Ajaib Singh woke up and he raised and alarm and he chased the applicant with the help of some others and arrested him. In the morning the applicant was taken to the police station where a report was lodged. The applicant's plea that at about 4 in the night he had gone out to ease himself and when he was passing by the side of Bitora he was chased and arrested by Ajaib Singh with other persons, was not accepted. 3. Section 52 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act of 1947; (Act XXVI of 1947), as amended by Act X of 1950, Act VI of 1952, Act XVIII of 1952 and Act II of 1955, provides that an offence punishable u/s 447, I.P.C. if committed within the jurisdiction of a nyaya panchayat shall be cognisable by such nyaya panchayat. The various other offences cognisable by the nyaya panchayat as enumerated in Section 52 of the Act did not, however, cover the offence punishable u/s 456, I.P.C. under which the applicant was charged by the Magistrate and under which he had been convicted by the Magistrate on 20-10-1953. Prior to the passing of the Amending Act (No. II of 1955) Section 55 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act read as follows: No Court shall take cognisance of a case...which is cognisable under the Act by a Panchayati Adalat unless an order has been passed by a sub-Divisional Magistrate...Under Section 85. 4. Prior to the passing of the Amending Act (No. II of 1955) Section 55 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act read as follows: No Court shall take cognisance of a case...which is cognisable under the Act by a Panchayati Adalat unless an order has been passed by a sub-Divisional Magistrate...Under Section 85. 4. Then followed Section 56 which provided: If at any stage of proceedings in a criminal case pending before a Magistrate it appears that the case is triable by a Panchayati Adalat, he shall at once transfer the case to the Panchayati Adalat which shall try the case de novo. 5. The question arose, when these sections stood unamended, as to whether the High Court could pass orders transferring a case pending before a Court of Bench Magistrates to the Panchayati Adalat in relation to a charge exclusively cognisable by the Panchayati Adalat within the powers conferred by Section 56 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, and it was decided by this Court in Abdul Aziz v. State 1950 A.W.R. (H.C.) 529 that the power conferred by Section 56 was a power to be exercised by the Magistrate before whom the case is pending and it was not a power which could be exercised by any other Court, and the High Court not pass orders transferring the case u/s 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure because that section did not provide for the same, but the Court could, in view of the powers of superintendence conferred on it by Sub-clause (1) of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, give directions to the Bench Magistrates to act in a manner justified by law. In that case therefore a direction was given to the Bench Magistrates to transfer the case u/s 323, I.P.C. to the Panchayati Adalat having jurisdiction over it. 6. Sections 55 and 56 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act have been considerably amended by the subsequent Acts and by Act No. 11 of 1955. The amended sections reads as follows:- 55(1). After a nyaya panchayat has been established for any area, no court, except as otherwise provided in this Act, shall take cognisance of any case triable by such nyaya panchayat. (2) .... The amended sections reads as follows:- 55(1). After a nyaya panchayat has been established for any area, no court, except as otherwise provided in this Act, shall take cognisance of any case triable by such nyaya panchayat. (2) .... (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52 and in Sub-section (1) of this section any Court may take cognisance of any offence Under Sections 431 and 447 of the I.P.C. if it is otherwise competent to do so. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52 and Sub-sections (1) to (3) of this section, but subject always to the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where any court has taken cognisance of any offence referred to in the said sections and a summon or warrant as; the case may be has issued for the appearance of the accused in such case, the offence may be inquired into and tried by such court. 56. A Court, if it finds that a case is triable by a nyaya panchayat, shall, except as provided in Sub-section (4) of Section 55, transfer the case to the nyaya panchayat of competent jurisdiction which shall thereafter try the same de novo. 7. The amended Section 55 made a considerable departure from the provisions of the old section. Under the amended section it was provided that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52, (which mentioned the offence triable exclusively by a nyaya panchayat) and notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1) of Section 55 (which mentioned that after a nyaya Panchayat has been established for any area, no court, except as otherwise provided by the Act, shall take cognisance of any offence triable by a such nyaya panchayat) any court may take cognisance of an offence Under Sections 431 and 447 of the I.P.C. if it is otherwise competent to do so. 8. Amended Section 55 further provided that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52 and Sub-sections (1) to (3) of Section 55, but subject always to the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where any court has taken cognisance of an offence referred to in the said sections and a summon or a warrant, as the case may be, has been issued for the appearance of the accused in such a case, the offence may be inquired into and tried by such court. The limitations existing in the original section have now been relaxed, and if a case punishable u/s 447, I.P.C., which was originally exclusively cognisable by a nyaya panchayat if the offence were committed within the jurisdiction of such Panchayat, has now been made cognisable by any court having jurisdiction over the matter, more especially where the Court in furtherance of the cognisance taken by it has issued summons or warrant, as the case may be, for the appearance of the accused in such case. Section 56 has also been completely altered. Whereas the old Section 56 enjoined that if at any stage of proceedings in a criminal case pending before a Magistrate it appeared that the case was triable by a Panchayati Adalat, the Magistrate had no other option but at once to transfer the case to that Panchayati Adalat which was to try the case de novo. Under the amended section a court (which includes a court of appeal or a court of revision) if it find that a case is triable by a nyaya panchayat shall, except as provided in Sub-section (4) of Section 55, transfer the case to the court of nyaya panchayat of competent jurisdiction which shall thereafter try the same de novo. 9. Counsel for the applicant has urged that the court should now take recourse to amended Section 56 of the Act and should send the case for trial to the nyaya panchayat. If the amended Section 56 is to be applied strictly, I do not think that the suggestion made on behalf of the applicant should be accepted, because an offence punishable u/s 447 of the Indian Penal Code has now been made cognisable by any court otherwise competent to do so in view of Section 55(3) of the Act. Furthermore, Sub-section (4) of Section 55 as it now stands has made it clear that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 52 and Sub-sections (1) to (3) of Section 55, but subject always to the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where a court has taken cognisance of an offence u/s 447 and has issued process for the appearance of the accused, the offence may be inquired into and tried by such court. Under the amended provision of law it would not at all be necessary to direct a retrial of the case upon the facts set out above. Under the amended provision of law it would not at all be necessary to direct a retrial of the case upon the facts set out above. Nor can it be said that the conviction of the applicant was not in accordance with law. The application in revision is therefore dismissed. The applicant is to surrender to his bail to serve out the sentence.