Order.- The revision petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No. 675 of 1965 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate’s Court, Thiruvalla. The complaint was that the accused committed offences punishable under sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. After the prosecution evidence, the case was posted to 8th December, 1965. When the case was called on that day, the complainant was not Present in Court. The Court, therefore, discharged the accused under section 259, Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner canvasses the correctness of this order. Section 259 of Criminal Procedure Code states: “When the proceedings have been instituted upon complaint, and upon any day fixed forhearing of the case-the complainant is absent, and the offence may be lawfully compounded or is not a cognizable offence, the Magistrate may, in his discretion, notwithstanding anything herein before contained, at any time before the charge has been framed, discharge the accused.” The offence under section 279 is cognizable and non-compoundable. That is not disputed. But, it was argued that even if one of the offences alleged to have been committed is non-compoundable or cognizable, so long as the other offences alleged to have been committed are non-cognizable or compoundable, the learned Magistrate was competent to discharge the accused under the section. I do not think that the learned Magistrate has any such power. In Boni Lal v. Pranab Kumar1, this question was considered. In that case there was a joint trial of the accused for offences under sections 117, 224 and 353, Indian Penal Code, andthe accused were discharged under section 259 on account of the absence of the complainant. It was held that as all the offences were non-compoundable and those under section 224 and 353 were cognizable, section 259 could not be involved that the correct course for the Magistrate was to enforce the presence of the complainant and his witnesses and being a joint trial the fact that the offence under section 117 was not cognizable would make no difference. The terms of the section are clear that in a case where the complainant alleges the commission of an offence which is cognizable or non-compoundable the Magistrate cannot dismiss the complaint under the section for the absence of the complainant. Therefore, I set aside the orders of the Court below and direct theMagistrate to take the case to his file and proceed in accordance with Law. Therefore, I set aside the orders of the Court below and direct theMagistrate to take the case to his file and proceed in accordance with Law. The petition is allowed. M.C.M. ----- Petition allowed.