Judgment : The accused in S.T.C.No. 1636 of 1993 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. I, Pudukkottai, has filed this petition under Sec.482, Crl.P.C, praying to call for the records in the above case and quash the same. 2. Short facts are: Judicial Magistrate No. II, Pudukkottai had sent the complaint under Sec. 228, I.P.C. read with Sec. 345(1)and(3),Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner. The allegations in it are briefly as follows: On 10. 1993, at about 11.20 a.m., the complainant was recording the evidence tendered by Selvaraj in Crl.M.P.No. 1625 of 1993. At that time, the accused, who is Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade-II, suddenly entered into the court hall in mafti, put cigar in his mouth and lighted it, smoked the cigar and blow the smoke towards the Magistrate and laughed at him and shouted aloud. The Magistrate asked the Office Assistant to apprehend him. But the accused ran away from the court hall. Because of this act on the part of the accused, the Magistrate could not discharge his work in recording the evidence in Crl.M.P.No. 1625 of 1993. The accused had insulted the court and had disturbed the proceedings of the court as above and hence he is liable to be punished under Sec. 228, I.P.C. Along with this complaint, the learned Magistrate had sent the statements of Paramanathan and Jayar-aman, Office Assistant, Krishnan, Assistant, Si-trarasu, Balakrishnan and Shanmugham, Advocates. According to Mr.I. Antony Oscar, the learned counsel this was taken on file in S.T.C.No. 534 of 1993 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. II, Pudukkottai. The accused in that case has filed this petition for quashing the same. 3. Mr.I. Antony Oscar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that in this case, the proceedings were sent to another Judicial Magistrate and the procedure envisaged under Sec. 346, Crl.P.C was not followed and hence the proceedings are liable to be quashed. His submission is that as per Sec. 346, Crl.P.C, the Magistrate in whose court offence under Sec. 228, I.P.C., is committed should forward the case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same, after recording the statement of accused and in the instant case, the statement of the accused was not recorded and this lapse would amount to noncompliance of Sec. 346, Crl.P.C, and so the proceedings should be quashed. 4. 4. To consider the above submission, Sec. 346(1), Crl.P.C, need extraction. It reads as follows: “346. Procedure where court considers that case should not be dealt with under Sec. 345: (1) If the Court in any case consider that a person accused of any of the offence referred to in Sec345 and committed in its view or persons should be imprisoned otherwise than in default of payment of fine, or that a fine exceeding two hundred rupees should be imposed upon him, or such court is for any other reason of opinion that the case should not be disposed of under Sec. 345, such court, after recording the facts constituting the offence and the statement of the accused as hereinbefore provided, may forward the case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same, and may require security to be given for the appearance of such person before such Magistrate, or if sufficient security is not given shall forward such person in custody to such Magistrate”. [Italics supplied] A plain reading of the section would clearly show that the statement of the accused meant in Sec. 346, Crl.P.C, “the statement of the accused as hereinbefore”provided“. 5. So for the purpose of considering this clause, we have to go to the prior section, wherein the provision was made for the statement of the accused. I shall presently extract Sec. 345, Crl.P.C. wherein the statement of the accused occurs. It reads as follows: "345. Procedure in certain cases of contempt: (1) When any such offence as is described in Sec.175, Sec.178, Sec.179, Sec.180 or Sec. 228 of the Indian Penal Code is committed in the view or presence of any civil, criminal or revenue court, the court may cause the offender to be detained in custody and may, at any time before the rising of the court on the same day, taking cognizance of the offence and, after giving the offender a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished under this section, sentence the offender to fine not exceeding two hundred rupees, and in default of payment of fine, to simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, unless such fine be sooner paid. .(2) In every such case the court shall record the facts constituting the offence, with the statement (if any) made by the offender, as well as the finding and sentence. .(2) In every such case the court shall record the facts constituting the offence, with the statement (if any) made by the offender, as well as the finding and sentence. .(3) If the offence is under Sec. 228 of the Indian Penal Code, the record shall show the nature and stage of the judicial proceedings in which the court interrupted or insulted was sitting and the nature of the interruption or insult“. [Italics supplied] There is reference to the statement of the offender viz. the accused in Sec. 345(2), Criminal Procedure Code. It states that in every such case, the court shall record the facts constituting the offences, with the statement (if any) made by the offender, which means the accused. The very court before which the contempt was committed, after recording the statement (if any) made by the offender, the finding and sentence shall be recorded. In the instant case, the Magistrate thought it fit to act under Sec. 346, Criminal Procedure Code and had forwarded the case to another Magistrate. So the occasion to record the finding and sentence referred in Sec. 345 (2), Criminal Procedure Code does not come in this case. The stage prior to that is the statement, (if any), made by the offender. The words”if any“cannot be ignored. Evidently these words were intended to visualize a situation like this where the accused ran away from the court hall. So, I am clear that”the statement of the accused as herein before provided“refers to the statement mentioned in Sec. 345(2), Criminal Procedure Code, is”the ‘statement, (if any), made by the offender’ and so only in such a case where statement could be recorded, it has to be sent to the Magistrate to whom the Magistrate forwards the case. If the statement of the accused could not be recorded, as in this case, the occasion to send the same does not arise. Taking that view of the matter, I am unable to accept the submission made by Mr.I. Antony Oscar. 6. In the result, the petition fails and shall stand dismissed.