9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respondent No. 6 to the petitioners u/s 160, Cr.P.C. are hereby quashed. No further notice u/s 160, Cr.P.C. shall be issued by him upon the petitioners hereafter to enforce their attendance from Delhi as witnesses in connection with Laban P.S. Case No. 63(11)04. Insofar as the notice u/s 91, Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is hereby declared that the personal attendance of the petitioners before the respondent No. 6 is not necessary merely for production of the documents required by him in connection with that case. However, there shall be no costs. - Tinlianthang Vaiphei, J. ORDER Tinlianthang Vaiphei, J. 1. The legality of the notices issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.I.D. Headquarters, Meghalaya, Shillong under Section 160/91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requiring the petitioners, who are residing in New Delhi, to appear before him at Shillong for recording their statements in connection with Laban P.S. Case No. 63(11)04 under Section 408/415/418/420/423/424/464/468/471/120B, I.P.C. and for production of some documents, are under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Though the facts pleaded by the petitioners in the writ petition are man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments need to be produced w.e.f. 1998-2 1. Bank statement 2. Book of account 3. Investment Register 4. Income Tax Return 5. Balance Sheet 6. Return and documents filed with ROC Herein fail not. Sd/- (C. Syrti MPS) Dy. Superintendent of Police, CID (Hqr), Meghalaya, Shillong. 3. There is no dispute at the bar that the petitioners No. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 are residents of Daryaganj, New Delhi while the petitioner No. 3 is a resident of Faridabad, Haryana : they are then obviously not within the limits of Shillong Police Station or within the adjoining police station. The notices reproduced hereinabove indicate that the petitioners have been required to appear before the respondent No. 6 at the C.I.D. Headquarters at Shillong. Before proceeding further, it may be useful to refer to the provisions of Sections 91 and 160, Cr.P.C. hereunder: 91. Summons to produce document or other thing.-- (1) Whenever any Court or any officer in charge of a police station considers that the production of any document or other thing is necessary or desirable for the purposes of investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code by or before s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance. It is, however, with respect to Section 160 that the controversy has cropped up. Because the personal attendance of the petitioners are considered by the respondent No. 6 to be necessary as they appear to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the criminal case registered at Laban Police Station, Shillong. Mr. V.K. Jindal, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that when the petitioners are admittedly residents of Delhi, the summons for their personal appearance issued by the respondent No. 6 at Shillong is contrary to the provisions of Section 160 inasmuch as this provision speak of the persons being summoned to be necessarily within the limits of the police station of the police officer making the investigation or the adjoining police station. According to the learned senior counsel the language of Section 160 is clear and unambiguous and does not leave any room for two views, namely, the persons, even if they are acquainted with the facts and circumstances to be summoned must be residing within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the police, officer making the investigation or the adjoining police station, and any other interpretat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovides that the State Government may, by rules made in this behalf, provide for the payment by the officer of the reasonable expenses of every person, attending under Sub-section (1) at any place other than his residence. Conjoint reading of both the sub-sections and the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 160 plainly indicate, firstly, that the person to be summoned by the officer making the investigation must reside within the local limits of his own police station or within the adjoining area, secondly, that in the case of a male person under the age of fifteen years or woman, their attendance cannot be enforced at any place other than their residence even if they reside within the limits of the police station of the police officer making the investigation or within the limits of the adjoining police station and, thirdly, that reasonable expenses of every person other than a male person under the age of fifteen years or woman attending such requisition at any place within the limits of the police station shall have to be paid by the concerned police officer as per rules framed by the State Government in this behalf. If the contention of the learned Additional Advocate General ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
