DATTATRAYA NARAYAN SAMANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .The petitioners have filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as also under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order of framing charges against the petitioners, dated October 13, 1980, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay. In this criminal application the question that falls for determination is whether the impugned order of framing of charges complies with the requirements prescribed by section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, i.e., whether there were sufficient grounds for proceeding to frame charges by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The charges which are framed against the petitioners and original accused No. 5, one Shankar Vithal Savardekar are on five counts in all and the present petitioners are charged for having agreed between August 1978 and January 1979 to do or cause to be done illegal acts, i.e., offences of causing physical harm to one Shri Naval Godrej, Kersi Godrej and others and these acts of causing harm to the above mentioned persons were in pursuance of the said agreement of conspiracy and thereby all the petitioners had committed acts punishable under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The remaining charges refer to the physical assault caused, in pursuance of this conspiracy, to various persons referred to above by accused No. 5 and that all the accused had committed offences punishable under sections 120-B, 307 read with section 115 of the Indian Penal Code. It is not necessary to refer to each of the charges at this stage except to mention that the present petitioners are said to be implicated with the offences alleged to have been committed by accused No. 5 on the basis of an agreement entered into by all of them between the period from August 1978 and January 1979.

(2.) . Before the various statements recorded by the Investigating Officer in this case are referred to in some details, it is necessary to refer briefly to the incident in question.

(3.) . According to the prosecution, on the night of 8th of January, 1979, at about 8.15 p.m. accused No. 5 had gone to the residence of Shri Naval Godrej at 40-D, Ridge Road, Malabar Hill, Bombay, and no sooner Shri Naval Godrej opened the door himself than accused No. 5 is alleged to have stabbed Shri Navel Godrej, Smt. Phiroza Godrej and Smt. Goolbai Dastoor. In the statement recorded, Shri Naval Godrej has given a Hindi version of what accused No. 5 is alleged to have said at the time of the assault. After stabbing Naval Godrej who tumbled down near the table, his daughter-in-law Smt. Phiroza Godrej came to his rescue who too was stabbed with a knife. Thereafter mother-in-law of Shri Naval Godrej, Smt. Dastoor who also came to help them was also assaulted by the assailant and she also fell down on the floor. Thereafter the accused made his escape good until he was arrested on January 21, 1979 at Hubli. It is not necessary of refer to the investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer as far as the case against accused No. 5 is concerned. At this stage, some details of investigation will be referred to as and when they becomes relevant for the purpose of consideration of this application. In the statement of Shri Godrej recorded on the 13th January, 1979, he had stated that he did not find any reason for the assault on him and his family members except the labour union rivalry. Shri Godrej also suspected that as he had negotiated with the new union of Godrej Boyce Workers for bonus and other demands, Dr. Datta Samant had been criticising the management and in fact had brought a morcha in December 1979 and had demanded that Shri Godrej should see Dr. Samant, which Shri Godrej had refused and instead asked his representative Shri Bardi to meet Dr. Samant. Shri Godrej further stated that Dr. Samant had threatened him and other members of the management on that occasion.