S K GHOSH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed these five applications Under Section 561-A Cr. P. C. for expunging certain derogatory remarks against him made by the learned Munsif-Magistrate, 1st Class, Khurda in his judgments in G. R. Cases Nos. 369, 421, 422, 467 and 516 of 1965. At the relevant time, petitioner was working as Inspector general of Police, Orissa. All these cases were heard together for the sake of convenience.

(2.) THE brief facts which gave rise to the aforesaid G. R. Cases are as follows: Shri dukshishyam Singh Samant, who figures as opposite party No. 2 in each of these criminal misc. cases, was working as the Fire Station House Officer, Khurda. He was transferred and Shri Banshidhar Pradhan who was examined as P. W. 4 in G. R. Cases Nos. 369, 421 and 422 of 1965 and as P. W. 1 in G. R. Cases Nos. 467 and 516 of 1965 was posted in his place and directed to relieve and take over charge from Shri Singh Samant. Shri Pradhan commenced taking over charge from his predecessor on 19-6-65. During the process of taking over charge, shortage of some petrol and cash of Rupees 401/-was detected which Shri Singh samant could recoup only on 25-5-65, on which (date-sic), the taking over charge was completed. On the F. I. R. lodged by Shri Pradhan on 3-8-65 alleging criminal misappropriation in respect of cash and petrol by his predecessor, investigation was taken up and ultimately a chargesheet was submitted Under Section 409, 465 and 467, I. P. C. which was registered as G. R. Case No. 369 of 1965. During investigation, the I. O. alleging to have detected further instances of misappropriation of money and petrol, drew up two more F. I. Rs. (Exts. 24 and 25) on 31-8-65, and after investigation, submitted two further charge-sheets which were registered as G. R. Cases Nos. 421 and 422 of 1965. Similarly, in the course of further investigation, the I. O. alleging to have detected further instances of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of petrol drew up two further F. I. Rs. (Exs. 21 and 22) on 29-9-65 and 3-11-65; investigated and submitted two more chargesheets which were registered as G. R. Cases Nos. 467 and 516 of 1965 respectively.

(3.) THE learned Munsif-Magistrate who tried all these five cases recorded one set of evidence in the three G. R. Cases Nos. 369, 421 and 422 of 1965 and another set of evidence in G. R. Cases Nos. 467 and 516 of 1965, but disposed of the five cases by five separate judgments dated 13-5-67 acquitting the accused in all of them. The procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate of recording one set of evidence with respect to trial of three separate cases and another set of evidence in the trial of two other separate cases, each case relating to a distinct offence unconnected with the other, apparently is not one warranted by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, For the present purpose, however, this aspect is not very material, because the applications are confined to expunging of certain derogatory remarks against the petitioner in each of these different judgments and the regularity or otherwise of the trials or the orders acquitting the accused is not in question.