MUKESH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Gupta, J. Heard applicants counsel and learned A. G. A.

(2.) THIS is an application under Sec tion 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the warrants issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Al lahabad, to the Superintendent of Jail, Aligarh, directing him to produce the ap plicants before him in case crime No. 497 of 1997 under Sections 395/397, IPC Police Station Sarai Inayat, district Allahabad.

(3.) THE provisions of" Section 267, Cr. P. C. read with Form No. 36 leaves no room of doubt that the expression "other proceeding under this Code" would mean only such proceeding as may be pending in a court. THE object of issuing such a war rant is to ensure the attendance of a person in court to answer to the charge of an offence or for the purpose of any proceed ing against him or for giving evidence as a witness. That power can be exercised in the course of an inquiry or trial or other proceeding pending before a court. That power cannot be utilised during the course of investigation of the case. THE stage of inquiry or trial comes only after comple tion of investigation. THE applicants case is that neither any inquiry or trial nor any proceeding is pending against them in any court at Allahabad. If it is so, warrant, 'b' could not be issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Reliance was placed on the case of Smt. Bharti Sachdeva v. State, 1996 Cr. L. J. 2102. In the aforesaid decision a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court followed the view taken by Delhi High Court in the case Qiharshad Mehta v. C. B. I. , (1992) 3 CCr 2793, and it has been held that the court can exercise the powers under Section 267, Cr. P. C. only for the purpose of asking an accused detained in a case in another Jail to answer to the charge in inquiry or trial or in the proceedings pending before him or for giving evidence as witness in Court but cannot require his attendance to answer the charge in investigation. THE term "other proceeding" has been examined at length in order to hold that this does not include investigation by the police. It was also observed that investigation of the of fence by the police and interrogation can not fall" under the purposes which are in cluded in Section 267 of the Code.