From the Judgment and order dated 30 6 1972 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Crl.
Subba Rao J. as he then was wrote a dissenting opinion.
2 RR No.
208 209 of 1974.
The allegations in the companyplaint, as summarised in the judgment of the High Court in Criminal Revision Application No.
3 for 78 S. Plates and Invoice No.
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated 18/19 1 1974 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Revision Application Nos.
The learned Judges answered all the questions, posed above, in the negative.
declining to allow the accused to take photostats of all the documents, on the ground that the documents companyld number be allowed to be taken outside the companyrt.
The appellant accused 1 appeared before the Presidency Magistrate.
The High Court further declared that the accused and his companynsel shall be entitled to inspect those documents and take companyies thereof, if necessary, in the companyrt.
he accused 1 had numberright to obtain companyies of the documents companycerned.
The accused pleaded number guilty and again made an application repeating his request for companyies of the statements of witnesses recorded by Inspector Kakade.
After making that companyfessional statement, Balkishan is said to have led Inspector Kakade, in the presence of Panchas, to Tulsiram Gupta Mills Estate Compound, wherefrom 35 M.S. Plates were recovered.
On August 24, 1973, the Magistrate framed a charge under Section 3 a of the Act to the effect?
The judgment of the Court was delivered by majority companysisting of Raghubar Dayal and J.L. Kapur JJ.
He recorded the statement of Tukaram, the owner of one of these motor trucks on February 7, 1971.
On November 14, 1970, one Ram Singh who was having R. R. No.
and endorsed the same to M s. Vallabhaji Brothers, Clearing Agents at Akola Goods Shed for taking the delivery.
He also prayed that he be allowed to inspect all the statements recorded by the prosecution and take companyies thereof.
No 630 OF 1977.
1973 and September 7, 1973, and the framing of the charge against him, the appellant invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court by a petition under Section 561A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and prayed that the said orders be quashed.
He further prayed that he should be allowed to take photostats of all the documents in the presence of the companyrt officer.
On June 11, 1973, an application was filed by the appellant to the Magistrate, making a grievance that although three witnesses had been examined, numbercopies of the documents were furnished to him by the prosecution.
892857 for 60 M.S. Plates signed the RRs.
This decision was rendered by a Bench of three learned Judges.
The petition was heard by a Bench companysisting of Vaidya and Gandhi, JJ.
Hence, these appeals by the accused persons.
ERKC 9447 Ex.
The list of documents included the list of statements of various persons recorded by the Inspector of the Railway Protection Force.
The Magistrate rejected this application, also, by an order on September 7, 1973.
A. Nos.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
The Magistrate further passed an order on August 3, 1973.
ERKC 75531.
The inquiry into this case was entrusted to the Complainant Inspector, P. A. Kakade, who is an officer of the Railway Protection Force.
AND SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CRL.
1,813.80 P., and the 78 Plates were removed by the said party in lorries.
2.247.40 P. The said Ram Singh posed as a proprietor of Modern Industries which was found to be a fictitious firm, which never existed.
He took delivery of 78 plates from one J. Meshram after paying the necessary railway dues of Rs.
The Delivery of the second companysignment of 60 M.S. Plates was taken on November 16, 1970 after paying the railway dues of Rs.
In the companyplaint, Inspector Kakade stated that accused 2 and 3 are absconding Annexed to the companyplaint was a list of prosecution witnesses numbering, in all, 40 and a list of documents numbering 62.
were unloaded by Unloading Foreman, one B. D. Raverkar of Akola Goods Shed.
ERKC 75531 Ex.
The Inspector further discovered that the M.S. Plates were shifted from Devi Dayals companypound to Nittal Estate, Kurla Andheri Road, Marol Naka and they were transported from there for Devi Dayals Estates.
K. Gambhir and Miss Ram Rikhyani for the Petitioner in SLP No.
In this petition, he challenged the companystitutional validity of Section 9 of the Act.
81/72.
Appeals 208 and 209 of 1974 , under Section 3 of the Act.
He, however, added that if any request to secure the photostat companyies in the Court companyes, it will be companysidered.
The Presidency Magistrate companymenced an inquiry and recorded the statements of four witnesses, of one on March 2, 1973 and of the other three on June 12, 1973.
208 209.
V. J. Francis, and D. K. Garg for the Appellant in Crl.
HSPG BNDN to Akola and Wagon No.
Rev. No.
E The appeals arise in these circumstances The Inspector, Central Intelligence Bureau, Head Quarters, Bombay Shri P. A. Kakade filed a companyplaint before the Presidency Magistrate, 35th Court, Victoria Terminus, Bombay, companyplaining of the companymission of an offence by the appellants, herein, in Crl.
The Magistrate on August 3, 1973, passed an order rejecting the accuseds application, dated June 11, 1973, on the ground that the offence companyplained of against him was number cognizable and the provisions of Section 251A of the Code of Criminal Procedure were number applicable, and companysequently.
In the meantime, investigation regarding the offences of forgery and cheating was being done at Akola by the companycerned Police Sub Inspector, who was directed to suspend his inquiry till further orders were received by him.
L. Nain and M. N. Shroff for the Respondent in Crl.
In view of this statement of the Government Pleader, the High Court set aside the orders of the Magistrate and directed the companyplainant under Section 165 of the Evidence Act to produce in the trial companyrt the true companyies of the statement of the witnesses already examined and to be examined hereafter By the companyplainant and of the documents on which the companyplainant desired to depend.
821/72 and 305/74.
Tukaram stated that his lorry was engaged on November 1, 1971, by the appellant.
In the companyrse of that inquiry, the statements of certain persons, including that of Balkishan, appellant herein, were recorded by the said Inspector.
630/77.
Seventynine M. S. Plates Mild Steel Plates were unloaded from Wagon No.
He was then supplied the list of prosecution witnesses and the list of documents to be relied upon by the prosecution.
The Deputy Commercial Superintendent, Bhusawal, on November 19, 1970, informed all companycerned that the delivery from these wagons was obtained on fraudulent Railway Receipts.
821 of 1973, are as under On November 21, 1970, the Assistant Security officer, Central Railway, Bhusawal intimated to the Chief Security officer, Bombay V.T. that two wagons Nos.
But, on the other aspects of the case, the Assistant Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the State, stated before the High Court that the prosecution did number desire to keep back any material from the accused and that they would produce companyies of statements of all the witnesses and the documents on which the prosecution intends to rely or which the accused wanted to examine.
On January 31, 1971, while inquiring into another case of Wadi Bunder in which Balkishan was involved, the Inspector recorded the companyfessional statement of Balkishan, appellant, herein.
Clerk Onkar of the said firm was sent to take delivery.
Feeling aggrieved by the orders passed by the Magistrate on August 9.
982859 Invoice No.
that on or after November 14, 1970 the accused was found in possession of M.S. Plates numbering about 110, which were the Railway property unlawfully possessed by him.
On June 25, 1973, the appellant made a further application to the Magistrate, requesting for supply of true companyies of all the documents in the case to enable him to prepare his defence.
