from various illegalities. It is submitted that though accused 1 to 3 are deleted from the array of accused pursuant to the refusal of authorities concerned to accord sanction for their prosecution, fact remained that allegations regarding offences punishable under the Act also are involved in which case notwithstanding that accused 1 to 3 are not on record, trial of the case could only be by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge. Reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in Surendran v. State of Kerala (1979 KLT 547). Further argument is that since no offence exclusively triable by the Special Judge who is a Sessions Judge is involved, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was not correct in committing the case to the Special Judge. The offences charged against petitioner being tribale by a Magistrate of the First Class, the case should have been tried by the said court. It is also argued that petitioner was not heard before this Court passed Annexure-III, order. Learned counsel for the CBI contended that as per Annexure-I, order there is a direction to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to commit the case as provided under Sec.306(5)(a)(i) of the Code, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was bound to comply with that order and so far as Annexure-III, order stands contention that the case should not
