Short Note : 1. A question had been referred to the High Court by Civil Judge, Class I Chhatarpur under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The question posed was whether Magistrates after taking cognizance of offences triable by a Nyaya Panchayat could transfer the cases to Nyaya Panchayat. 2. Held: The cases reported to this Court by the Civil Judge are all governed by M.P. Panchayats Act. Under section 229 of the Panchayats Act, subject to such exceptions a Nyaya Panchayat shall take cognizance of and try any offence specified in the Schedule. Under this provision a Magistrate has not been given concurrent jurisdiction with a Nyaya Panchayat as was under section 68 of the old Act. Section 233 has the same wording as that of section 72 of the old Act and it provides that if a complaint of any offence mentioned In the Schedule be made to a Magistrate, he shall, instead of taking cognizance of offence, direct the complainant to present the complaint to the Nyaya Panchayat within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed Now, a clear departure has been made in the new Act under sections 228 and 238. Section 228 gives exclusive Criminal jurisdiction to the Nyaya panchayat notwithstanding anything contained in the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 238 bars jurisdiction of Criminal Courts for taking Cognizance of any offence which is cognizable under this Act by a Nyaya Panchayat unless the Nyaya Panchayat has passed an order in writing under 'Section 278 or unless the Sessions Judge or any other Judicial authority has passed an order in writing under section 246 Section 246 empowers Sessions Judge to cancel jurisdiction of Nyaya Panchayat with respect to any criminal case. Section 278 empowers a Nyaya Panchayat to transfer certain cases to regular Court when the Nyaya Panchayat is of opinion that the case is of such a nature or of such intricacy or importance that it ought to be tried by a regular suit Therefore, there can be no manner of doubt that the jurisdiction of Magistrate and Nyaya Panchayat under the present Act are not concurrent, the jurisdiction of Nyaya Panchayat is exclusive and that of Magistrate is suspended and is revived only when action is taken under section 246 or when an order is passed by a Nyaya Panchayat under section 278. Section 238 clearly bars jurisdiction of a regular Court. Section 238 clearly bars jurisdiction of a regular Court. Therefore, the only option before the Magistrate is to transfer such cases to the Nyaya Panchayat which are exclusively triable by Nyaya Panchayat. This has to be done under section 238 by the Magistrate himself and there is no question of the Magistrate's taking cognizance of such offences. Even when cognizance has been wrongly taken nothing prevents Magistrate from transferring the cases to Nyaya Panchayat. Under section 192 (2) of the old Code and new Code cases can be transferred after taking cognizance'. If the transfer was not quite in accordance with these sections it would be a mere irregularity as provided by section 529 (b) of the old Code and 460 (f) of the present Code. Therefore, in all the 7 cases reported, the Magistrate had rightly transferred the cases to Nyaya panchayats because the offences were exclusively triable by a Nyaya. Panchayat. State v. Mehtar Bisau Lodhi, 1961 JLJ 985 , State of M. P. v. Raghubar, 1966 MPLJ SN 39, Phediya v. Mayaram, -1961 MPLJ SN 255, Narmada Prasad v. Moorat Singh, 1969 MPLJ 710 referred to.