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

2010 (2) TMI 941

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n and adjudication are done by two separate wings and the courts cannot become party to the investigation - Once the investigation is done in presence of the court, the court becomes a witness to the investigation - the order dated 18th September 2010 passed by learned ACMM granting bail to the respondent is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the present ACMM for considering the application of the respondent/accused afresh on merits without being influenced by the order of earlier ACMM. Powers to interfere into the investigation - The Supreme Court laid down that it is not necessary for prosecution to examine the person, who was the sanctioning authority, to prove the sanctioning order - Despite clear ruling of the Suprem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l custody, an application was made by the petitioner department to make enquiries from the respondent /accused in Central Jail, Tihar, Delhi under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act so as to complete certain aspects of the investigation. The permission was sought so that Mr. Anil Chandeliya, Senior Intelligence Officer may visit Central Jail, Tihar and make enquiries from the respondent. The learned ACMM directed that the respondent accused be not interrogated in Central Jail, Tihar but he be brought to the Court and any enquiry be made before the court on 17th September 2010 at 10 am. He issued production warrants of the accused/respondent to be brought before the Court on 18th September 2010. Thereafter, the accused was produced and the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Section 491 Cr.P.C. . 4. The inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have been granted only to the High Courts and there are no inherent powers available to the courts subordinate to the High Court. The subordinate courts are supposed to act in accordance with the provisions of Cr.P.C. and cannot transgress the limits imposed upon the courts by Cr.P.C. There is no provision in Cr.P.C. that a court can order that an enquiry be made from the accused in its presence nor the court can order that interrogation of accused by the investigating agency be done in presence of the court. This is to keep the judicial functions and executive functions separate. Once the investigation is done in presence of the court, the court becomes a witness to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rfere with the investigation . In Dukhishyam Benupani, Asst. Director, ED (FERA) v. Arun Kumar Bajoria, 1998 (1) S.C.C. 52, the Supreme Court observed, it is not the function of the court to monitor investigation processes so long as such investigation does not transgress any provision of law. It must be left to the investigating agency to decide the venue, the timings and the question and the manner of putting such questions to person involved in such offences. A blanket order fully insulating a person from arrest would make his interrogation a mere ritual . 5. It is thus apparent that the learned ACMM who possessed no inherent powers to interfere into the investigation showed keen interest in the investigation in this case and wanted t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e sanction was granted without application of mind, though law is that the court cannot draw any adverse conclusion that the sanction for prosecution was not properly granted or was defective without indicating any basis for such conclusion. Out of 78 cases decided by this ACMM from April, 2010 to October 2010, he discharged/acquitted accused persons in 73 cases only on this technical ground. The conviction in remaining five cases was under compulsion because accused persons pleaded guilty. 7. Without going into the merits of the case and looking into the conduct of learned ACMM that he transgressed all limits of judicial propriety, the order dated 18th September 2010 passed by learned ACMM granting bail to the respondent is hereby set as .....

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