G S R KRISHNAMURTHY Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING and impugning the order dated 27.9.2007, passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,(E.O.I), in Crl.M.P.No.3367 of 2006 in E.O.C.C.No.302 of 1984, this criminal revision case is focussed.

(2.) COMPENDIOUSLY and concisely the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this criminal revision case would run thus:The Income Tax Department filed a complaint against the accused, before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, E.O.I, who took it on file as E.O.C.C.No.302 of 1984, for the offence under Sections 120B read with Sections 193, 196, 420, 109, 34 and 37 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 276C(1), 277 and 278 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This case is having a chequered carrier of its own and suffice to say that earlier this Court had occasion to pass order on June 30, 1991 in Crl.M.P.No.3158 of 1994 when the trial was in progress, the learned Public Prosecutor filed the M.P.No.3367 of 2006 in E.O.C.C.No.302 of 1984 under Section 321 of Cr.P.C.read with 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking consent to withdraw the prosecution as against A1 to A3. After hearing all the parties concerned, the learned Magistrate passed the order dismissing the said petition the operative portion of which is extracted hereunder for ready reference.". 12. In view of the above findings that IPC offences under Sections 120B and 420 are still on record for prosecution and no permission has been granted by the Central Government to the Special Public Prosecutor to withdraw the entire case including the IPC offences against A1 to A3, the present petition to withdraw the case against A1 to A3 is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.".

(3.) THE point for consideration is as to whether there is any perversity or non-application of mind on the part of the Magistrate in appreciating and applying the correct provisions of law while dismissing the Crl.M.P.No.3317 of 2006.