KESAR LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two petitioners herein, keshav Chand and Ashok Kumar, were challaned before the Additional Chief judicial Magistrate, Delhi, for offences under sections 379, 420, 411. 468 and 471 Indian Penal Code . The prosecution case against the petitioners according to the challan was that they had committed theft of a fiat car belonging to Shri K. T. Mirchandani on the night between 26th and 27th April, 1971 when the car was parked outside the III class waiting room of the Railway Station New Delhi, and that after changing the registration number of the car and making false entries in the registration certificate, the petitioners had sold the car at Nagpur to one Suresh Khanna for Rs. 15,000.00 . When the case came up tor consideration before the learned Magistrate for the purpose of framing. charges against the petitioners it was contended on their behalf that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the petitoners forffences under sections 468, 471 and 420 Indian Penal Code as these offences were aiiegcd to have been committed at Nagpur. The learned Magistrate did not accept this contention as he was of the view that all the offences alleged against the petitioners formed part of the same transaction. The learned Magistrate, therefore, proceeded to frame charges against the petitioners under sections 379, 411, 468, 471 and 420 Indian Penal Code read with section 34 Indian Penal Code . The petitioners thereupon filed a revision petition in the Court of Session challenging the jurisdiction of the trial Court to try them for offences under sections 468, 471 and 420 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code which were alleged to have been committed at Nagpur. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has expressed the view that the offences that were, alleged to have been committed at Nagpur were not covered by section 179 Criminal Procedure Code . and that the Courts at Delhi did not have jurisdiction to try the petitioners for such offences. He has, therefore, made a reference to this Court with a recommendation that the order of the learned Magistrate framing charges against the petitioners under sections 468, 471 and 420' read.with section 34 Indian Penal Code be quashed.

(2.) Under section 177 Criminal Procedure Code

(3.) Sections 178 to 184 Criminal Procedure Code . are exceptions to the general rule laid by section 177 Criminal Procedure Code . Section 179 which has been noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge reads as follows :