DURGA DAS MUNDHRA Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment would dispose of three revision -petitions Nos. 125 -D, 13o -D and 174 -D of 1962 filed respectively by Durga Dass Mundhra, Sardari Lal Sabharwal and Madan Mohan Kochar, hereinafter referred to as Mundhra, Sabharwal and Kochar against the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi.

(2.) THE three petitioners were challenged by Special Police Establishment for offences punishable under section 120 -B read with sections 467, 471 and 420, Indian Penal Code, and also under sections 467, 467/ 471 and 420, Indian Penal Code. Shri J. C. Aggarwal, Magistrate First Class, Delhi, in whose Court the commitment proceedings took place, discharged Mundhra and Sabharwal accused and ordered that a charge be framed under section 467, Indian Penal Code, against Kochar accused and he be committed to stand his trial in the Court of Sessions. The State thereupon filed a revision petition in the Court of Sessions against the order of the Magistrate about the discharge of Mundhra and Sabharwal accused. Kochar filed a separate revision against the order committing him for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, accepted the State revision and directed the Committing Magistrate to commit Mundhra and Sabharwal accused to the Court of Sessions for trial of offences which appeared to have committed by them according to the allegations of the prosecution. Revision -petition filed by Kochar was dismissed and it was directed that such other charges might also be added in addition to the charge under section 467, Indian Penal Code, which appeared to have been committed by him in the light of observations made earlier.

(3.) IT is further alleged that near about May, 1953 before the arrival of the goods covered by the second conversion Sabharwal arranged with B. N. Mehta, Proprietor of Messrs. B. H. Mehta and Company, Bombay, for forward sale of goods to be imported against the second conversion of the import licence. Direct negotiations were then carried on between Mundhra and Mehta for that purpose and an arrangement was entered into between the parties for the sale of the goods covered by the second conversion. When the chemical goods arrived it was brought to the notice of the authorities concerned that the goods had been imported against forged endorsement. Some of the goods had been released by that time but the goods, which had not been delivered, were seized. On a report dated March 20, 1953, made by Shri D. R. Sundaram, Director (Administration; of the office of the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi, a case was registered and after investigation by the Special Police Establishment the three accused were challenged.