CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. DHARAMPAL SINGH CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the respondents remains absent.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and it has initiated proceedings against accused 1 to 6 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 473 and 477 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the IPC for brevity) and Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and had furnished a list of witnesses, including one B.V. Ashwathanarayana Shetty, who was shown as CW. 1.

(3.) IT is noticed that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dharam Pal, if the court is empowered to exercise power under section 319 of the CrPC, at any stage of the proceedings, it becomes difficult to go behind that process of the court in having formed an opinion that a person could be made an accused. If on the allegations of accused nos. 1 to 3, the court has indeed formed an opinion that there was sufficient material to hold that the witness CW. 1 can be made as accused no. 7 in the case on hand, the only avenue open to the prosecution would be to invoke Section 307 CrPC and it is still possible for the court to exercise its power in accordance thereof. For the object of Sections 306 and 307 CrPC is to allow pardon to be tendered in cases where a grave offence is alleged to have been committed by several persons so that with the aid of the evidence of the person pardoned, the offence could be brought home to the rest. (See. State Of Andhra Pradesh vs. Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao, : 1963 AIR 1850). The policy is to prevent the escape of offenders from punishment in grave cases for lack of evidence by grant of pardon to accomplices for obtaining true evidence. As could be seen from Sub -section (2) of Section 306 of the CrPC, one class of cases to which the section applies is in respect of cases pending before a Special Judge appointed under a special law. Since the present case is one such, it is open for the prosecution to invoke such Sections 306 to 308 of the CrPC, in order that they may bring home the charges against the other accused. It is therefore for the petitioner to make an appropriate prayer before the court below in this direction notwithstanding that CW. 1 has been made an accused in the present case on hand.