Committal orders cannot be quashed on reappraisal of evidence; High Court interference is confined to a point of law.

A valid committal order made by a competent Magistrate is not liable to be quashed merely because a higher court would reassess the evidence differently or consider the offence insufficiently grave. The Magistrate's discretion to commit the case for trial in the Court of Session is governed by his own opinion on whether the case ought to be so tried. Where committal is made under the relevant provision, High Court interference is confined to cases involving a point of law. On that basis, the committal order was left undisturbed and the reference rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether a committal order made by a competent Magistrate under the Code of Criminal Procedure could be quashed on a mere reappraisal of the evidence or on the view that the offence was not sufficiently grave, in the absence of any point of law.

Analysis: Section 347 confers wide discretion on the Magistrate to commit a case when it appears to him that the case ought to be tried by the Court of Session. The governing test is the Magistrate's own opinion, not whether a superior court would have formed the same view on the evidence. Where the committal is made under Section 213, Section 215 restricts interference by the High Court to cases involving a point of law. A committal order once validly made is therefore not to be set aside merely because a higher court considers the matter less serious or would have reached a different conclusion on the facts.

Conclusion: The committal order could not be quashed in the absence of a point of law, and the reference was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A committal order made by a competent Magistrate under Section 213 cannot be quashed except on a point of law, and not on a mere reassessment of the evidence or the gravity of the charge.

---