CHANDRAKANT DESAI Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Admit. Heard finally by consent.

(2.) Learned counsel for the revision applicant has assailed the impugned judgment and order on two grounds (a) the investigation could not have been carried out without sanction of the concerned magistrate as the offence punishable under section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act is non cognizable and (b) secondly, no reliance could have been placed upon the breathe test report, the same being not admissible in evidence.

(3.) Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the application submitting that both these challenges have been extensively dealt with by the learned Magistrate in the impugned order and neither any illegality and/or incorrectness and/or impropriety could be found in impugned order and therefore, this is not a fit case for interfering with the impugned judgment and order.