LAWS(ALL)-1976-10-18

KANT SHASTRI Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On October 12, 1976
SHRI KANT SHASTRI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. 1974 by Shri Kant Shastri and five others for quashing the order of the learned City Magistrate, Allahabad dated 10th September, 1975 and the order of the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad dated 17-1-76. It has also been prayed that the City Magistrate be directed to record the statements of the witnesses which the petitioners may like to produce before him in the proceedings pending in the court. The facts giving rise to this application are that there is an institution named Seva Ashram Inter College, Dhindhue in the District of Paratapgarh. On 20th October, 1973 the Station Officer, P.S. Patti submitted a report that there were two rival managing committees of the institution claiming to be in possession of the institution and that there was an apprehension of breach of the peace. A similar report was submitted by the Tahsildar, Patti on 21st October, 1973. The District Magistrate, Partapgarh, on 24-11-1973 being satisfied that there was a dispute relating to the institution which was likely to cause breach of the peace, passed a preliminary order under Sections 145 and 147 Cr.P.C. calling upon the parties to submit their written statements. He also ordered for the attachment of the property of the institution and appointed District Inspector of Schools, Partapgarh as its Receiver.

(2.) ON 26-9-1974 the learned Magistrate ordered both the parties to adduce oral evidence and he fixed 4-10- 1974 as the date for evidence. It appears that the statements of the witnesses of the opposite parties were recorded by the Magistrate. Thereafter an application for transfer of the case was moved by the present petitioners and the case was transferred by the High Court to District Magistrate, Allahabad who sent it for disposal to City Magistrate, Allahabad. In the court of City Magistrate, Allahabad the petitioners examined five witnesses and on 10-9-1975 moved an application which was accompanied by a list of 44 witnesses. They sought permission to adduce them as witnesses. The learned Magistrate was of the view that the witnesses were being produced only to delay the proceedings in the case. He, therefore, rejected the application of the applicants. Aggrieved against the order of the learned Magistrate the petitioners filed a revision which was heard and disposed of by the learned VII. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Allahabad who was of the view that the applicants should have moved an application for an adjournment rather than submit an application seeking permission to produce witnesses which already existed on record. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the proceedings were under the provisions of Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and the parties have a right to adduce whatever evidence they like to adduce. Section 147 (1-A) which is relevant provides :

(3.) THE petition is, therefore, allowed and the order of the learned Magistrate dated 10-9-1975 and the order of the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge dated 17-1-1976 are quashed. The learned Magistrate is directed to record the statements of the witnesses mentioned by the petitioners in their list of such of them as they may prefer to produce. Petition allowed.