STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. JAYANTILAL KALIDAS MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common point of law arises in these two Criminal Revision Applications, filed by the State, against the order of discharge, passed by the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, 2nd Court, Mazgaon, Bombay on October 18, 1976. The respondent -original accused is also common.

(2.) CASE No. 2505/P of 1974 and case No. 2506/P of 1974, were filed against the respondent Jayantilal Kalidas Mehta, who is the Proprietor of M/s Pravinchandra Jagdishkumar and Co. He was assessed for sales tax for the Samvat year 2023 and on his producing certificates in Form No. 16, deductions were granted to him. It appears for the period June 4, 1967 to July 28, 1967, on the basis of a declaration of one Chandrakant S. Sahu, deductions to the extent of Rs. 24,600 were granted to the accused. Similarly, for the period between June 5, 1967 to October 15, 1967, on the basis of a declaration of one Hiralal Gandhi, deductions to the extent of Rs. 51,923 were granted. Both these persons deny having signed any such certificate. Consequently, the Sales Tax Officer filed a complaint with the police against the respondent for proceeding against him under Sections 467, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) A reading of Section 63, Clauses (c), (f), (ga), (k) and (m) would show that knowingly furnishing a false return, giving a certificate which is known to be or believed to be false, issuing or producing before the Commissioner a false certificate, knowingly producing a false document or furnishing incorrect information and aiding or abetting such offences, are offences punishable under that section. It was therefore, argued that the prosecutions in question under the Indian Penal Code were filed to circumvent the provisions of Section 67 of the Sales Tax Act, That was not permissible under the law and hence the prosecutions could not proceed. The State did not deny that no action under the Sales Tax Act was taken or is in contemplation. It is however, maintained that proceeding against the accused under the Penal Code is proper.