HOSHIAR SINGH Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner seeks to have the order dated Dec. 7, 1976 quashed. The relevant facts for the disposal of this case are under :

(2.) On Aug. 25, 1975, Shri S.K. Bhardwaj, Food Inspector lifted sample of Maida' from a person who gave out his name as Mohan Lal from shop No. 90, Dariba Kalan, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. On analysis the sample was found to be adulterated. Consequently a complaint was filed against Mohan Lal under section 7/16 of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act'). He was arrested and challaned but was bailed out later and the case was adjourned to 4th June, 1976 for recording evidence. Mohan Lal was alleged to have died during the pendency of that case on 30th May, 1976. A certificate was produced on 4th June, 1976 regarding the death of Mohan Lal. The matter was adjourned to 11th June, 1976 to confirm about the death of Mohan Lal. On 11th June, 1976 the court on the information of the counsel for the accused that the accused had died and taking note of the death certificate issued by Dr. A.D. Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, whose statement was also recorded, the proceedings against Mohan Lal accused were dropped.

(3.) It appears that after the above said complaint was consigned to record room, on 25th Sept., 1976 Food Inspectors R.S. Tiagi and Rishi Ram Sharma had lifted three samples from shop No, 90, Dariba Kalan, Chandni Chowk, Delhi from where earlier sample was lifted by Food Inspector S.K. Bhardwaj from one Hoshiar Singh. Hoshiar Singh accused put in appearance in court on 26th Sept., 1976, when it was pointed out to the court by the Food Inspectors appearing in that case that this Hoshair Singh was the same person who earlier gave his name as Mohan Lall to Food Inspector Shri S.K. Bhardwaj who lifted sample of Maida on 25th Aug., 1975. The case on 26th Sept., 1976 was being dealt with by a duty Magistrate who passed orders that accused Hoshiar Singh be produced before Shri J.D. Kapur, Metropolitan Magistrate on 27th Sept., 1976. The case was taken up by Shri J.D. Kapur, Metropolitan Magistrate on 27th Sept., 1976. He sought identification of Hoshiar Singh, accused for which purpose he recorded the statement of Shri S.K. Bhardwaj, Food Inspector. On being satisfied by the statement of Shri S.K. Bhardwaj, Food Inspector, the learned Magistrate directed the accused to be remanded to judicial custody till 8th Oct., 1976 directing that the question of granting bail to him would be considered on receipt of the file M.C.D. Vs. Mohan Lal which was earlier directed to be consigned to the record room on the report that accused Mohan Lal in that case had died. It further appears from the record that on 8th Oct., 1976, Dr. A.D. Kumar who had signed the death certificate was present in court. The learned Magistrate confronted him with his signatures on the death certificate. Dr. Kumar admitted his signatures on the death certificate and stated that the certificate was prepared at the request of some person on his depositing fee of Re. 1/- and that a copy of the certificate can be procured by any person. Dr. Kumar further apprised the court that the basis of death certificate was the entry in the death register made on the information supplied by any person and that the death register was maintained by the Sub-Registrar at Nigam Bodh Ghat. The learned Magistrate on the statement of Dr. A.D. Kumar directed that the Sub-Registrar (Shri S.K. Bhardwaj), Nigam Bodh Ghat, Delhi be summoned with the record. In the meanwhile the petitioner moved a bail application which was heard by Shri R.N. Aggarwal, Sessions Judge, Delhi. By his order dated 11th Oct., 1976 the learned Sessions Judge, Delhi allowed the application and directed the petitioner to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 3000.00 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, in case M.C.D. Vs. Mohan Lal under Sec. 7/16 of the Act. A further direction was also given that the petitioner will join the investigation as and when he was required to do so by the police.