STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. DURGA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave raises questions regarding the interpretation of the provisions of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, XXIX of 1966. The main question for decision is whether the inquiry which an officer of the Railway Protection Force holds under Section 8 (1) of the Act is an investigation within the meaning of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. If so, statements recorded during the course of the inquiry would be inadmissible in evidence by reason of the injunction contained in Section 162 of the Code. A further question which requires consideration is whether the entire trial is vitiated if signatures of witnesses are obtained on the statements made by them during the course of the inquiry.

(2.) The respondent Durga Prasad was working as a Turner in the Railway Workshop at Gorakhpur. On April 2, 1968 he was found in possession of a steel rod and two pieces of moulded brass shells belonging to the Railway. After the preparation of a recovery memo the respondent was forwarded to the Railway Protection Force Post where a case was registered against him under Section 3 (a) of the Act.

(3.) Gajai Singh, Sub-inspector, Railway Protection Force inquired into the case under Section 8 (1) of the Act, during the course of which he recorded the statements of three persons:Rakshak Indra Deo Yadav, Rakshak Jagannath Pandey and R.K. Nandi. The statements were read over to these persons and their signatures were obtained thereon. Two others, G.S. Tripathi and Kamlakant Yadav wrote out their statement in their own hand and handed over the same to Gajai Singh.