CHARLES Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani in Crl.M.P.No.5457 of 2001 in STC.NO.1347 of 2000, allowing the petition filed by the prosecution to add the petitioner as an accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.

(2.) The circumstances under which the said order came to be passed is as follows: Originally, prosecution was launched against one Mani for offence under Section 4(1)(k) of the Tamilnadu Prohibition Act, alleging that he allowed certain persons to have drinks in his wine shop. To substantiate the above, six witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution. Subsequently thereafter, when the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, he has informed that he was not the owner of the shop and that the petitioner herein was the person who owned the same. It is on the basis of this statement, a petition had been filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C to add the petitioner as an accused and the same was allowed. It is against the same, the present revision has been filed.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the prosecution case itself is that it was the accused in STC.NO.1347 of 2000, namely Mani who allowed the premises to be used for drinking and no where it has been suggested that the petitioner herein was ever involved, nor any of the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution has stated about his involvement in the offence or that he is the owner of the premises and therefore, the petitioner cannot be added as an accused.