A K DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 2-6-1995 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Dhanbad, in W. M. Case No. 309 of 1992, wherein the Court below has rejected the prayer of the petitioner-Company (petitioner No. 2) to allow the Law Officer of the Company (petitioner No. 1) to be represented in that case.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is manifest that the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dhanbad, has misread the provisions of Section 305 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Under the said provisions, a Company has the right to appoint a representative of its choice to appear on its behalf in criminal proceedings. Petitioner No. 1 is the Law Officer of the Company in this case and, as such, can be authorised to be represented by the Company. He is not strictly speaking a lawyer, as held by the court below in its earlier order dated 29-3-1995. Though the petitioners did not challenge that order but instead made an application before the Court below, they are not prevented from moving this Court through an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to challenge the impugned order. This is so, as the impugned order merely states that a similar application was earlier rejected by the order dated 29-3-1995. Since that order has been passed on a misconception of the law, the impugned order also suffers from the same illegality.