VENUGOPAL MUDALIAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an extraordinary application by one Venugopal Mudaliar who Is cited as P. W. 1 in the chargesheet filed by the police in C. C. No. 5 of 1950 on the file of the Additional Sub Magistrate, Vellore.

(2.) The circumstances which have given rise to this petition are these : The petitioner complained to the police that one Thandavarayan who was employed under him & dismissed by him, entered into his house & abused & threatened to cause bodily injuries to two ladies by name Rukmanl Ammal & Saradambal Ammal who were said to be in occupation of the house at the time. The pettitioner further alleges that he apprehended danger to his life & that of Rukmanl Ammal. The police after investigation has filed a charge-sheet against the accused in the case & as the petitioner is the informant he is cited as P. W. 1 in the charge sheet. The Assistant Public Prosecutor appears to be in charge of the prosecution. The petitioner has also engaged an advocate to assist the Assistant Public Prosecutor in the conduct of the prosecution.

(3.) On 4-10-1950 the advocate engaged by the petitioner presented a petition on behalf of the petitioner to strike out his name from the list of witnesses & to dispense with the examination of the petitioner as a witness in the case on the ground that the petitioner is not an eye-witness to the occurrence. Under what section of the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Evidence Act this petition is filed is not clear. Nor is it clear under what section of the Cri. p. C. the petitioner's advocate was permitted to interfere with the course & conduct of the prosecution which is in charge of the Assistant Public Prosecutor. However, strangely enough the Assistant Public Prosecutor himself inspired by the petitioner or his advocate (vide the allegations in para 5 of the petitioner's affidavit) field a petition on 13-10-1950 similar to the one filed by the petitioner's advocate to dispense with the evidence of the petitioner herein. The Magistrate very properly questioned the right of the petitioner's advocate to appear in the case & finally allowed the petition of the Assistant Public Prosecutor to dispense with the evidence of the petitioner. The magistrate however seems to have decided to examine the petitioner as a court witness; and It is stated that he has Issued a warrant against the petitioner. It is this procedure of the Magistrate & the proceedings in issuing the warrant that are sought to be Questioned & quashed. The petitioner also seeks the transfer of this case from the file of the present magistrate to some other court.