CHANDRAN Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner should be directed to pay the batta to the witness summoned by him or should the State meet that expense.

(2.) The petitioner is an accused in a case initiated by the Food Inspector under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. As per R.206(b) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, Kerala the allowances of complainants and witnesses (whether for the prosecution or for the defence) shall be paid by the court in cases in which prosecution is instituted or carried on under the orders or with the sanction of the Government or of any public servant acting as such. The prosecution under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act can be instituted only with written consent of the Central or State Government or of any person authorised by those Governments (Vide S.20 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act). Thus prima facie the allowances of all witnesses summoned in the case must be paid by the court.

(3.) R.206 of the Criminal Rules of Practice starts with the words "subject to the rules hereinafter contained". It is therefore to be seen whether there is any other provision in the rules which would go against the above said meaning of R.206. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that witnesses summoned under S.254(3) or 243(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure will not fall under R.206 of the Crl. Rules of Practice. He bases bis argument on Clause.4 of R.210. It states "When a public servant appears in his official capacity as a witness in a case which does not fall under R.206 or 207 as in the case in which sub-s.(3) of S.254 or sub-s.(2) of S.243 of the Code is applied, the party at whose instance he is summoned, shall pre-pay into court the travelling and halting allowance admissible to him under the Service Rules applicable to him." This shows that public servants may be summoned to be witnesses and if they are summoned under S.254(3) or 243(2) then the party summoning them must prepay the travelling and halting allowances. When they are summoned under any other provision of the Code their expenses will be met by the court. This according to counsel, will give a clue as to the payment of batta. As in the case of public servants other witnesses may be summoned under the provisions of S.254(3) or 243(2) of the Code. In such cases the batta should be paid by the party summoning those witnesses.