LAWS(P&H)-1953-2-16

STATE Vs. LEKH RAJ DHANNA

Decided On February 17, 1953
STATE Appellant
V/S
LEKH RAJ DHANNA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two questions arise for decision in these cases viz. (1) whether it is necessary to frame a formal charge in a warrant case tried summarily under the provisions of Chapter XXII of the Code of Criminal Procedure and (2) whether an accused person is entitled to re-call and re-cross-examine the prosecution witnesses as required by the provisions of Section 256, Criminal Procedure Code

(2.) On 7.8.1952, a vehicle containing about twelve maunds of wheat was intercepted by the Police while it was on its way to Delhi and three persons were prosecuted under Section 7, Essential Sup plies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946. They were tried summarily under the provisions of Chapter 22, Criminal Procedure Code, and two of them were convicted and were awarded sentences of imprisonment. On appeal to the Sessions Court, the learned Additional Sessions Judge remanded their case for retrial on two grounds viz., (1) that a formal charge in writing had not been framed against the convicts; and (2) that the accused were not afforded an opportunity of recalling the witnesses under the provisions of Section 256, Criminal Procedure Code The Delhi State Government is dissatisfied with the order of remand and has come to this Court in revision.

(3.) The relevant provisions are embodied in Chapter 22, Criminal Procedure Code Section 262 provides that, subject to certain exceptions, the procedure prescribed for summons cases shall be followed in summons cases, and the procedure prescribed for warrant cases shall be followed in warrant cases. Section 263 declares that in cases where no appeal lies, the Magistrate need not record the evidence of the witnesses or frame a formal charge; but that he shall enter certain particulars in a register maintained for the purpose. Section 264 provides that in cases where an appeal lies, the Magistrate shall record judgment embodying the sub stance of the evidence and the particulars mentioned in Section 263 and declares that such judgment shall be the only record in cases coming within this section.