Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1994 (10) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... orated under the Companies Act at Satara. Searches were also made at the office of the respondent on 26-81985 and 4-10-1985. The raids were conducted on the ground that offences had been committed by the respondent relating to manufacture and selling of beer without payment of excise duty. On 22-11- 1985 cases were registered against the respondent under Sections 65(b), (d), (e); 661(1)(b); 72; 75(c); 77(b); 79; 82(1); 83 and 108 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. 3. After the registration of the cases against the respondents investigation was carried out and on 21-11-1986, five charge-sheets were filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Satara. Simultaneously, the prosecution also filed two applications before the CJM. In the first a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... em to have their say. The order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 21-11-1986 was also assailed on the ground that the court could not take cognizance of the offence on an "incomplete police report" and therefore, it had no jurisdiction to issue the process against the respondents. 4. The High Court found that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, on 21-11-1986, had allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the charge-sheet, without recording any reasons and without hearing the respondents and behind their back. The High Court further found that the Chief Judicial Magistrate was aware from the application filed by the prosecution that the charge-sheet was 'incomplete' and as such, it could not have taken cognizance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... State Government stating: (a) the names of the parties; (b) the nature of the information; (c) the names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of case; (d) whether any offence appears to have been communicated and, if so, by whom; (e) whether the accused has been arrested;whether he has been released on his bond and, if so, whether with or without sureties; (g) whether he has been forwarded in custody under Section 170. 7. The purpose of the submission of the police report with the details as mentioned above, is to enable the Magistrate to satisfy himself, whether on the basis of the report and the material filed along with the police report, a case for taking cognizance has been made out or not. After app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... evidence before the Magistrate. 8. In the instant case, the Chief Judicial Magistrate was obviously satisfied with teh sufficiency of the material placed by the prosecution before him with the report for taking cognizance of the offence and he therefore proceeded further after taking cognizance and directed the issuance of process against the respondents. The prayer of the investigating agency seeking permission to further investigate and submit a "supplementary charge-sheet" could not vitiate the cognizance taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate nor denude him of his jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence. The High Court while quashing the order dated 21-11-1986, did not record any finding to the effect that the exercis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... report. The High Court was, therefore, not at all justified in opining that since the charge-sheet on the prosecution's own showing was 'incomplete', the Chief Judicial Magistrate could not have taken cognizance and quashed the order of the CJM taking cognizance of the offence. We may also record at this stage that Shri Dholakia, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted before us that apart from the material already filed with the police report/charge-sheet, on the basis of which the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on 21-11-1986, the State does not intend to file any further material by way of any supplementary chargesheet before the trial court. The statement of Shri Dholakia, adequately protects the inter .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates