LEITANTHEM BIDHU SINGH Vs. KHANGJRAKPAM IBOBI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all the above cases referred to this Court either by the Additional Sessions Judge or by the Principal Sessions Judge, Manipur, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the common question which arises for determination is whether the affidavits, sworn before any Magistrate, other than the concerned District Magistrate or S.D.M. or Magistrate First Class, before whom proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. are pending, should not be considered by him in coming to a conclusion under Section 145(4), Cr.P.C.

(2.) IN the above cases, affidavits, sworn before Magistrate, either First Class or Second Class in Manipur, were filed in the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. before the S.D.Ms. in the various cases. They were not sworn before the concerned S.D.Ms. before whom the proceedings were pending. The S.D.Ms. relied on them and passed orders under Section 145(4) Cr.P.C. The aggrieved parties assailed the orders in revision before the Sessions Court, Manipur. The Additional Sessions Judge relied upon the decision reported in Hemdan v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1966 Raj 5 and held that the affidavits, which were sworn before some other Magistrates, could not be received as evidence under Section 145(4) Cr.P.C. and referred the cases to this Court for quashing the orders of the S.D.M. In the cases referred to this Court by the Principal Sessions Judge, the counsel for the revision petitioners also raised the same point in this Court.

(3.) THERE are some provisions in Criminal Procedure Code which permit parties to file affidavits in certain cases: