JUDGMENT Ashok Agarwal, J. - The appellant is the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay. It has filed a complaint against the first respondent in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate Municipal Morning Court, Dadar, being case No. 3761 ME/1985 alleging an offence under section 377(A)(i) read with section 471 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. On the first date of hearing i.e. 10th October, 1985 the Hon. Metropolitan Magistrate, Municipal Morning Court, Dadar, Bombay, passed the following order disposing of the complaint: "Municipal Prosecutor present. One Shri Ramesh Udani for the Accused present. Prosecution witnesses absent. Request for time of Municipal Prosecutor is rejected. Hence accused is acquitted for want of evidence." The complaint was filed by a public servant. The complaint was not required to be verified as required under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate ought to have proceeded to frame a charge and record the plea of the accused. Even before this was done the learned Magistrate appears to have chosen to dismiss the complaint and acquit the accused on the ground that the witnesses were not present. The order is ex-facie erroneous and requires to be set aside. The case will go back to the trial Court a re-trial in accordance with law. 2. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Hon. Metropolitan Magistrate; Municipal Morning Court, Dadar, on 10th October, 1985, in Case No. 376/ME of 1985 is set aside and the case is remanded back to the trial Court for re-trial. The trial Magistrate will reissue the process against the accused and thereafter proceed with the trial and decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law. Petition allowed.