SRICHAND P HINDUJA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.3.2004 of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi whereby the learned Magistrate vide that order framed charge under Section 120-B and Section 420 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC against the petitioners and also framed a charge under Section 465 IPC against M/s A.B.Bofors.

(2.) It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that the judgment of the High Court in Crl.M.C.3938/2003 as also the connected matters dated 04.02.2004 has categorically stated the conclusions that have emerged from the discussion in the judgment and has stated as under:

(3.) Counsel contends that in paragraph 141 (ii) the court has directed the framing of charge against the petitioners under Section 120-B/420 IPC and has further in paragraph 143 directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to confine its evidence strictly in terms of charges for the offence punishable under Section 120-B/420 IPC against the petitioners. He, therefore, contends that the charge framed by the Magistrate is beyond the directions given by the High Court and, therefore, cannot be sustained. He also contends that the learned Magistrate was required to frame a charge in accordance with Chapter 17, Code of Criminal Procedure which he has not done and, therefore, the order under challenge is bad on that account as well.