1987 (7) TMI 4 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the correctness of the order of dismissal under section 204(4), Criminal Procedure Code, by the Income-tax Department.
2. Competency of the court to issue fresh summons when a non-bailable warrant remains unexecuted.
3. Interpretation of section 204(4), Criminal Procedure Code, regarding process fees payable by the petitioner.

Analysis:
1. The High Court of Madras addressed the challenge raised by the Income-tax Department against the dismissal order under section 204(4), Criminal Procedure Code. The court noted that notice to the accused was not required based on a previous decision. The court held that the dismissal under section 204(4) was not justified in this case.
2. The court examined the competency of the trial court to issue fresh summons while a non-bailable warrant remained unexecuted. It was observed that the original non-bailable warrant issued had not been canceled or executed, and a subsequent warrant was also pending execution. The court emphasized that the trial court should not have ordered fresh summons when the warrant was still in force.
3. The interpretation of section 204(4), Criminal Procedure Code, regarding process fees payable by the petitioner was crucial. The court highlighted that the petitioner, being the Income-tax Department, was exempted from paying process fees under the Criminal Rules of Practice. Therefore, the trial court's insistence on batta expenses from the petitioner was deemed incorrect. The court concluded that the dismissal under section 204(4) could not be justified due to the exemption of process fees for the petitioner.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the criminal revision and directed the matter to go back to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with the law. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to legal provisions and exemptions concerning process fees and the issuance of summons and warrants in criminal proceedings.