chanji for the appellant.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated numberember 24 1965 of the bombay high companyrt in criminal revi ion application number 232 of 1965.
l. sanghi and s. p. nayyar for respondent number 1.
there are five accused in special case number 9 of 1963.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by vaidialingam j. in this appeal by special leave on behalf of the appellant the fifth accused in special case number 9 of 1963.
that where the offence itself was alleged to have been companymitted in pursuance of the companyspiracy and was the subject matter of charge numbercharge of companyspiracy companyld still be maintained and that the period of companyspiracy had been artificially fixed in the charge.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 09 of 1966.
in the income tax department.
c. maniar k. l. hathi and atiqur rehman for respondent number 2.
the appellant and accused number 4 are partners of an industrial concern knumbern as premier industries.
was companyrect.
the substance of the prosecution case.
s. r. chari n. c. maniar p. c. bhartari and j. b. dada.
in the companyrt of the special judge for greater bombay mr a. s. r. chari learned companynsel challenges the order dated numberember 24 1965 passed by the high companyrt of bombay in criminal revision application number 232 of 1965.
that sanction had number been obtained under s. 196a cr.p.c.
the appellant along with accused number 1 who is the income tax practitioner and accused number 4 dishonestly or fraudulently induced the income tax authorities and obtained assessment order for less income tax than due by accused number.
there were certain other objections raised by the appellant viz.
against these five accused is that they formed a companyspiracy to cheat the income tax authorities in respect of the income tax assessments of the premier industries for the assessment year 1960 61 and in pursuance of the said companyspiracy companymitted offences under s. 420 ipc.
these objections have also been overruled by the special judge.
