T. SUTHENDRARAJA Vs. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM, MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of Designated Court No. I under TAD A Act of 1987, Poonamallee, Madras -56, dated 4.11.1993 in Crl.M.P.S.R. No. 47 of 1993, whereunder the court below has chosen to reject an application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking for a direction to proceed against one Sreenivasa Ayya for the alleged offence which he was said to have committed. The basis of claim projected before the Court invoking the provisions of Section 319 Cr.P.C. is the statement D.868 said to have been given before the police by the petitioner about the visit of the said Sreenivasa Ayya at 1:00 P.M. on 15.5.1991 to meet one Sivarajan and the discussion they were said to have had on the open terrace of the premises where they met. The petitioner also claims that the investigating authorities did not properly enquire the occupant of the house to probe the matter further and according to the petitioner the reason behind the same is that the respondent wanted to hide the real culprits and to throw the blame on the L.T.T.E.

(2.) THE Court below has not chosen to issue notice to the respondent since a doubt was entertained regarding the admissibility of such an application under law at this stage of the proceedings, and therefore, appears to have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner. The court below, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and after taking into account the relevant provisions of Cr.P.C. and particularly S.319 and some of the case law on the subject came to the conclusion that the application filed under S.319(1) of Cr.P.C. at the particular stage in which the proceedings are pending before the Court below is not maintainable under law and that the petitioner is also not entitled to the relief prayed for in that application on the materials sought to be relied upon for the purpose. On that view, the application came to be rejected. Hence the above revision.

(3.) SECTION 319 of Cr.P.C. reads as hereunder: