J D METHA Vs. P H NANAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two applications arise out of a criminal complaint filed by one P.H. Nanavati in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Girgaum, Bombay. Criminal Application No. 71 of 1983 is filed by the Chairman of the Navyug Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited, while Criminal Application No. 72 of 1983 is filed by one K.M. Shah, the Ex- Chairman of the Society.

(2.) For relevant facts leading to these criminal application require to be stated in order to appreciate the point involved in them. During the year 1979-80 P.H. Nanavati, opponent No. 1 in Criminal Application No. 71 of 1983 was the Chairman of the said Society, and one C.P. Wagh, opponent No. 2 in both criminal application was the Honorary General Secretary of the said Society. On November 24, 1980 Nanavati filed a complaint against Wagh under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code in the Metropolitan Magistrates Court, 14th Court, Girgaum, Bombay, which is numbered as Case No. 140 / S of 1980. The case of Nanavati against Wagh is that on November 1, 1980 a meeting of the managing committee of the said Society was held and in the said meeting in the presence of the members of the managing committee and others Wagh assaulted him.

(3.) On January 8, 1982 complainant Nanavati filed an application in the lower Court praying for a witness summons to be issued against original accused Wagh to produce 15 documents. That summons was served on Wagh, and he contended in the Court that he was not in possession of the said documents and, therefore, unable to produce the same. The contention of Wagh was accepted by the Court. It is necessary at this stage to mention that one K.M. Shah was the Chairman of the said society at the material time, who had field Criminal Application No. 72 of 1983 to review the order passed by this Court. Nanavati made another application on February 5, 1982 for a witness summons to be issued against K.M. Shah, who was then the Chairman of the said Society, calling upon him to produce the said documents. On the application field by Nanavati, the learned Magistrate on February 8, 1982 was pleased to issue a witness summons against Shri Shah. In pursuance of the summons of the Court, Shah appeared through an Advocate in the Court and objected for the production of the said documents. The objection was overruled by the learned Magistrate, directing the witness to produce the documents, and on production he was allowed to raise objections, if any, to the production of the said documents. Accordingly Shah objected to the production of the documents and also relevancy thereof in connection with the case pending before the learned Magistrate. Wagh, opponent No. 2- accused, supported the contention of Shah and opposed the production of the said documents. The learned Magistrate by his order dated July 7, 1982 held that the documents called for from the said Society have no relevance to the facts of the case, and, therefore, directed to return the documents to the said Society.