M R PILLAI Vs. MOTILAL VRIJBHUKHANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above 8 applications are filed by "the accused against whom 8 cases are pending In the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, 28th Court, Esplanade, Bombay. The petitioners pray in these revision applications that the order passed on March 22, 1969 rejecting the application filed by the accused in case No. 957/p of 1968 and the charge framed by the Presidency Magistrate on March 25, 1969 against the respective accused in 8 cases should be set aside and the petitioners should be discharged. As these petitions involve common points and relate to common facts, they can be disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) THE particulars of the charges framed against the petitioners in the 8 cases may be summarised and stated as in a tabular form as follows:--When the charges were framed against the accused, the accused pleaded not guilty and the hearing of the cases has been stayed by this Court after admitting the above revision applications filed by the accused.

(3.) THE material common facts relevant for the purpose of disposing of these revision applications are as follows:--On January 9, 1963, the Government of India issued a notification prohibiting forward contracts for sale or purchase of silver. On April 2, 1968 upon a complaint filed by the complainant, the Enforcement Officer of the Forward Markets Commission constituted under the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952, Sub-Inspector of Police, Crime Branch (Drugs Control), C. I. D. Bombay suspecting mat certain firms of bullion traders of Zaveri Bazar were conducting illegal forward trading in silver in contravention of Section 17 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 read with the aforesaid notification, raided the premises belonging to 8 firms suspected to be contravening the Act. During the raid, 47 persons including the petitioners were arrest-ed, several documents found on the premises or with the persons arrested were seized and the accused were released on bail by the police. Thereafter the documents seized were scrutinised by the officers of the Forward Markets Commission and one Pradhan designated as Research Officer sent reports to the police alleging that the documents scrutinised disclosed that the firms of the petitioners were entering into forward contracts in contravention of Section 17 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952. The rest of the persons arrested on the basis of the documents seized from them had merely settled their transactions entered into by them by payment of differences. On perusal of the reports submitted by the Research Officer Pradhan and all the papers and on recording the statement of Pradhan, the police filed 8 charge-sheets against the petitioners on October 31, 1968, In the meanwhile, the police applied to the Court for extension of the period of bail of all the accused from time to time After filing the aforesaid chargesheets, on November 15, 1968, art application was made on behalf of the police to discharge 38 of the 47 accused on the ground that there was no sufficient evidence to substantive any charge against them. The learned Magistrate immediately discharged the said 38 persons.