LAWS(DLH)-1980-3-22

STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION Vs. VED PERKASH

Decided On March 11, 1980
STATE Appellant
V/S
VED PARKASH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent Ved Parkash is accused of an offence u/s 302 Indian Penal Code for burning his wife by pouring kerosene oil over her on August 31, 1979. A report u/s 173 Cr. P.C. was filed in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate against him within 90 days but without the report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory and a scaled site plan which is required in pursuance of the High Court Rules to be prepared by a draftsman. The police purported to rely upon those documents and called their report an incomplete challan.

(2.) The accused moved for bail. Relying upon Hari Chand and Rajpal v. State, ILR (1977) II Delhi 367, the learned Additional Sessions Judge granted him bail on 14.12.79. According to the learned Judge, the challan was incomplete for want of the said two documents and may further require examination of the draftsman and the technician u/s 161 Cr. P.C. and since 90 days were over, the accused was entitled to bail under the proviso (a) to S. 167(2) Cr. P.C. The State filed this petition against that order praying for cancellation of bail.

(3.) In Tara Singh V. The State, A.I.R. 1951 S.C. 441, where two such very documents were not produced before the court, the Supreme Court held that non-production did not amount to an incomplete challan even if it were described by the police as such. This decision appears not to have been shown to the learned judge. He was also wrong in thinking that examination of the draftsman and the officer of the C.F.S.L. was necessary u/s 161 for the simple reason that this section does not compel a police officer to record a statement. This position has been more clearly elucidated in State of Haryana V. Mehar Singh, A.I.R. 1978 P. & H. 341(FB). Commenting upon Harichand (supra) it was observed therein that the learned judge without going into the question why the challan was incomplete assumed that the investigation of the case could not be said to have been comple ted as the police called its report an incomplete one. I am in most humble and respectful agreement with these observations.