K VEDANTA DESIKAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition to revise the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, refusing the request of the petitioner, who is accused in C. C. No. 108 of 1948, on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, of the offence of failure to pay the sales tax due to Government, under Section 15, Madras General Sales Tax Act, to summon defence witnesses at Government expense, and directing him to pay the batta of Rs. 140, required for the defence witnesses he wanted to be summoned.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor contra. The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposes this petition. I agree with him. The position in law is clear. Section 544, Criminal P. C., says:

(3.) I do not consider that, in this case, where a person was prosecuted, under Section 15, Sales Tax Act, for the failure to pay the sales tax, the lower Court was wrong in refusing to summon his costly defence witnesses at public expenses in these days of financial stringency. The discretion was used rightly. This petitioner, who was said to be liable to pay the sales-tax and thus augment the public revenues, wanted to diminish the public revenues by asking for his costly witnesses, in this bailable case to be summoned at public expense, and his attempt was rightly nipped in the bud; he was not a pauper unable to pay the batta, and he was unable to show any special reason also for the Government to shoulder a burden which should be normally his. However, Magistrates will do well, when passing orders, refusing like this, to give the reason for the orders, namely, that they do not consider this spending of Government moneys in the particular cases to be in direct furtherance of the interests of public justice. That will prevent the putting of such petitions having no substance in them. With these remarks this petition is dismissed.