ORDER The Sub-Inspector of Police, Mattanur, had filed a charge-sheet against nine accused for alleged offences under sections 296 , 323 , 324 , 224 , 225 , 353 and 147, Indian Penal Code. The case against the accused was that they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object disturbed a religious congregation and when the Police Constables on duty arrested the: first accused, the other accused forcibly released him and assaulted the Police Constables with intent to deter them from the discharge of their duty. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses in proof of their case. The only remaining witness to be examined was the Circle Inspector of Police who was the investigating officer. It is stated that repeated summons was taken for his appearance, but he did not appear. On the ground that the non-examination of the investigating officer would seriously prejudice the accused, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused. Notice was issued by this Court to the accused to show cause why the order of acquittal should not be set aside. There can be no doubt that the order of the Magistrate is clearly wrong and unsustainable in law. In a similar case in State of Kerala v. Saithu Muhammed Pareed Kunju3 Velu Pillai, J., had held that the acquittal of the accused on the ground that the investigating officer was not examined is not correct and retrial was ordered. In a later case in State v. Abboobakar4 a Division Bench of this Court, to which I was a party, has elaborately considered this question and held that it is the duty of the Court to see that justice is done by examining all necessary witnesses and to take coercive steps wherever necessary to enforce the attendance of the witnesses in Court. It is surprising that the learned Magistrate has not cared to follow the decisions of this Court on the matter, but has in haste passed a wrong order causing miscarriage of justice. Magistrates will do well to bear in mind that “despatch is a good thing but to do justice is better.” Therefore the order of acquittal has necessarily to be vacated. Magistrates will do well to bear in mind that “despatch is a good thing but to do justice is better.” Therefore the order of acquittal has necessarily to be vacated. Learned Counsel for the accused was not able to support the order of the learned Magistrate, but he made an appeal that this is not a case for ordering a retrial as the alleged incident took place more than two years ago and interests of justice do not require that the accused should be subjected to a fresh trial. On going through the facts of the case I cannot agree that this is not a case which requires further inquiry. I do not want to say anything more about the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice either of the parties. In the result, the order of acquittal is set aside and I direct that there should be a retrial against the respondent-accused. Before I close I am constrained to observe that the Circle Inspector of Police was not only indifferent to his duties, but showed utter disregard and disrespect to the Court when summoned to appear in Court. A copy of this order may be sent to the Government for information. M.C.M.-----Order of acquittal set aide and retrial ordered.