MODI, J.—This is an appeal by special leave under sec. 417(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against an order of acquittal passed by the Additional Munsiff Magistrate, Bayana, dated the 23rd October, 1963, acquitting the four accused respondents of offences under secs.322 and 504 I.P.C. 2. Having regard to the conclusion to which I have come as respects the quality of the judgment produced by the trial Magistrate, it is not necessary to state the facts out of which this appeal has arisen at any great length. Suffice it to say that according to the prosecution, on the 19th April, I960, at about 5 or 6 P.M. the complainant Mst. Budhias daughter Mst. Somoti was working in her field which was jointly held by the complainant and the accused respondents Chhotelal and Hari Singh. It appears that a fence was being erected around a part of the field which had been cultivated by the complainant. But the accused Hari Singh forcibly removed it. Thereupon Mst. Somoti raised an outcry. The complainant hastened to the place where from Mst. Somoti was crying. She saw that Hari Singh was dismantling the fence. She protested but in vain. The accused hurled abuses at her and beat her up with lathis. She raised an alarm whereupon a number of persons came on the spot and saved her. On the 22nd April, 1960, she lodged a complaint in the court of the Additional Munsiff Magistrate, Bayana. Earlier, she had got herself medically examined by the doctor at Bayana on that very date that is the 22nd April, 1960. Apart from examining herself, the complainant produced Mst. Somoti, her daughter, and two other witnesses Bhajan and Ramchand who had witnessed the incident, and also produced the doctor Anant Narain Joshi who had examined her injuries. Although the learned Magistrate has not taken the trouble of stating what the defence of the accused was, it appears from the record that one of the accused Chhotelal came forward with a counter story which was to the effect that on the very day of the incident Mst. Somoti and her companions had given a beating to his wife and that he had filed a complaint of that incident on the following day thereof, and, therefore, a false case had been brought against him. Somoti and her companions had given a beating to his wife and that he had filed a complaint of that incident on the following day thereof, and, therefore, a false case had been brought against him. The other accused completely denied to have had anything to do with the offences alleged against them. 3. This brings us to the judgment by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused. The judgment consists of about 6-1/2 pages out of which the first two pages give the facts of the case and the next four give a summary of the evidence produced by the complainant. It is only a part of the remaining half page which contains the entire discussion of the evidence led by the parties. I cannot do better than to quote this part to illustrate the kind of judgment which the learned Magistrate has produced in this case:— geus cdqyk; Qjhdsu dh cgl lquh o bLrxkls dh rkbZn esa c;ku xokgku o c;ku eqyfteku gLc nQk 342 lh-vkj-ih-lh- o lQkbZ ds xokg ,p-lh- dsnkjukFk ds c;ku i<+s o ns[ks rks ik;k fd eqLrxhlk o mlds lEcfU/k;ksa us eq- ds lkFk ekjihV dh FkhA fygktk bl dsl esa eqyfteku dks lansg dk Qk;nk nsrs gq, cjh fd;k tkrk gSA 4. I feel bound to point out that this was not a judgment according to law at all. The attention of the Magistrate is drawn to Sec. 367 Cr.P.C. which, omitting its immaterial portion, reads as follows:— "(1) Every such judgment shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by this Code, be written by the presiding officer of the Court or from the dictation of such presiding officer in the language of the Court or in English, and shall contain the point or points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision............ (2) It shall specify the offence (if any) of which, and the section of the Indian Penal Code or other law under which, the accused is convicted, and the punishment to which he is sentenced. (3).......................................... (4) If it be a judgment of acquittal it shall state the offence of which the accused is acquit ted and direct that he be set at liberty. (5)......................... (6).........................." I may state at once that the judgment before me does not fall within the exception recognised by sec. 367. (3).......................................... (4) If it be a judgment of acquittal it shall state the offence of which the accused is acquit ted and direct that he be set at liberty. (5)......................... (6).........................." I may state at once that the judgment before me does not fall within the exception recognised by sec. 367. Then, in the first place, it is not clear that the learned Magistrate had borne in mind the points for determination in this case, for his judgment does not give any indication thereof. In the second place, he has entirely failed to give the reasons for the decision to which he came. All that he has done in the judgment, which is questioned before me, is to have stated the case for the prosecution and given a gist of the evidence produced by the prosecution witnesses and then jumped to the conclusion to which he came, namely, that the complainant and her relations had given a beating to the accused and consequently the latter were entitled to the benefit of doubt. The learned Magistrate has not cared to give any reasons whatever why the witnesses produced by the prosecution in this case did not deserve to be believed. He has not dealt with the infirmities of the prosecution case at all. I should like to point out for the guidance of the Magistrate that a judgment like this serves no useful purpose whatever. For one thing, it does not show that he had applied his mind at all to the evidence led by either party to the case. He has omitted to give the reasons on account of which he felt persuaded to disbelieve the witnesses for the prosecution and believe those for the defence which again he has not discussed. The Magistrate owed it to himself to produce a judgment which would show that he had intelligently applied his mind to the case before him. For another, a judgment of this character affords no assistance whatsoever to this Court when it is challenged before it in appeal. All that it does is to roundly give the conclusion to which the learned Magistrate came, which is neither here nor there. For another, a judgment of this character affords no assistance whatsoever to this Court when it is challenged before it in appeal. All that it does is to roundly give the conclusion to which the learned Magistrate came, which is neither here nor there. It is the bounden duty of the Magistrate to produce judgments in cases coming up before him which are self-contained and which would show that he has intelligently applied his mind to the facts of the case and the evidence led therein by the respective parties and a criticism of the evidence justifying the conclusion to which the Magistrate feels persuaded to come. A judgment which does not fulfil these essential requirements of law is not a judgment at all. 5. The conclusion is, therefore, irresistible that the judgment produced by the Magistrate in the present case cannot be sustained and must be set aside. 6. Learned counsel for the accused then prayed that this Court be pleased to go into the entire evidence itself and make its own appraisement of the case. With this submission I have not felt persuaded to agree if only to impress upon the Magistracy that judgments of this character are no judgments at all in law and that this Court views with strong disapproval the kind of judgment which has been produced in this case. 7. For the above reasons, I allow this appeal, set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate and send the case back to him for a proper decision in accordance with law. I need scarcely add that both parties shall be allowed an opportunity of addressing arguments to the court before a fresh judgment is delivered. If the particular Magistrate who decided this case has in the meanwhile been transferred from Bayana, a copy of this judgment shall be sent to him at his present place of posting for his guidance.