Tax recovery by Magistrate under special statute is a persona designata function, barring Criminal Procedure Code revision.

A Magistrate acting under Section 23(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 to recover assessed tax as if it were a fine performs a limited statutory recovery function, not a criminal court function under the Criminal Procedure Code. The assessment of liability remains with the taxing authorities, while the Magistrate's role is confined to execution of recovery under the special statute. The proceeding is therefore executive in nature and the order cannot be treated as one passed by an inferior criminal court. On that basis, revisional jurisdiction under Sections 438 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not apply, and a revision against the recovery order is not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a Magistrate acting under Section 23(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, while ordering recovery of tax as if it were a fine, acts as a court under the Criminal Procedure Code or only as a persona designata, and whether such an order is revisable under Sections 438 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Analysis: The recovery provision conferred on the Magistrate a limited statutory function to realise tax already assessed under the Act. The assessment and liability questions were to be decided by the taxing authorities under the Act, while the Magistrate's role was confined to the mode of recovery. Such a proceeding was held to be executive and limited in nature, undertaken under the special statute and not under the Criminal Procedure Code. On that basis, the Magistrate was not acting as an inferior criminal court, and the revisional powers under the Criminal Procedure Code could not be invoked against the recovery order.

Conclusion: The order passed by the Magistrate under Section 23(2) was not revisable under the Criminal Procedure Code, and the revision petition was not maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the distraint order failed because the statutory recovery mechanism excluded criminal revisional jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A Magistrate empowered by a special taxing statute to recover assessed tax as if it were a fine acts as a persona designata performing a limited recovery function, not as an inferior criminal court, and the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be used to revise that order unless the statute so provides.

---