JUDGMENT
Trevelyan and Rampini, JJ.
1. We think it clear in this case that the conviction must be set aside. The conviction is under Section 82 of the Registration Act and Section 193 of the Penal Code. What happened is this. The District Registrar directed a Deputy Magistrate to make an enquiry as to certain matters which arose in regard to the registration of a document. This enquiry was made, and in the course of the enquiry certain statements made by the accused to the Deputy Magistrate were found to be false, and in respect of the making statements he has been convicted. It seems to us clear that section Registration Act has no application to the present case. That on false statement intentionally made before any officer acting in execution of the Registration Act. The Deputy Magistrate had no power whatever under that Act. It does not appear that he had any registering powers given to him by the Registrar under Section 11* of the Act. We cannot say, therefore, that Section 82 applies to this case. The words “any officer acting in execution of this Act” must mean an officer legally authorized to act in execution of the Act. Nor do we think that Section 193, Penal Code, is applicable. That refers to a stage of judicial proceedings. There was here no judicial proceedings. In the result the conviction and sentence must be set aside and the fine, if paid, will be refunded.
* Absence of Registrar on duty in his district.
[Section 11: Whenever any Registrar is absent from his office on duty in his district, he may appoint any Sub-Registrar or other person in his district to perform, during such absence, all the duties of a Registrar, except those mentioned in sections
(sic) Revision No. 172 of 1893, against the order passed by W. H. M. Gun, Esq., of (sic) Noakhali, dated the 25th of January, 1893.
