AMAR NARAIN MATHUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision by Shri Amar Narain Mathur against the order of Shri P.D. Pande, Special Judge, dated 19-1-1951, by which he allowed the Public Prosecutor to withdraw from the prosecution of five criminal cases, which were pending in that Court. Consequent upon such withdrawal, the accused in those five cases have been discharged. The contention of the applicant is that the Special Judge did not apply his mind to the facts of the cases when he consented to the withdrawal of the Public Prosecutor, & therefore, this Court should interfere & set aside the order of the Special Judge.

(2.) The opposite parties in this revision are the State of Rajasthan & seven other persons. A brief history of the facts, which have led to this revision, will be useful in understanding the case. His Highness the Rajpramukh promulgated the Rajasthan Special Criminal Courts Ordinance (No. XLIV of 1949) on 8-12- 1949. Under that Ordinance a Special Criminal Court was created on 3-1-1950, for the whole of Rajasthan, & Shri Pande was appointed Judge of this Court. On 5-1-1950, five cases were allotted for trial to this Court under Section 5 of the Ordinance. The first of these cases was against Shri Jai Narain Vyas, who was, once upon a time, Chief Minister of the former Jodhpur State, & his Personal Assistant, Shri Shyam Krishna Vyas. This is now case No. 8 of 1950, of the Special judge's Court. The second case was against Shri Mathura Das Mathur, former Education Minister of the former Jodhpur State, & Shri M.L. Sanghi. This is now case No. 6 of 1950. The third case was against Shri Dwarka Das Purohit, former Finance Minister of the former Jodhpur State, & Shri M.L. Sanghi. This is now case No. 7 of 1950. The fourth case was against Shri Mathura Das Mathur & his Personal Assistant, Shri Kapur Chand Mangal, & it is No. 9 of 1950 now. The last case was against Shri Dwarka Das Purohit & his Personal Assistant, Shri Mukand Lal, & is No. 2 of 1950 now. These cases were under various sections of the Penal Code, & some evidence was taken in one of them. The accused, however, took the objection that the Rajasthan Special Criminal Courts Ordinance was 'ultra vires' after the coming into force of the Constitution of India. This objection was disallowed, & they had gone to the Supreme Court of India, & the proceedings before the Special Judge were stayed. In the meantime, the State of Rajasthan decided to withdraw the prosecutions & consequently an application was made on 19-1-1951, under Section 494, Criminal P.C., by Shri M.R. Purohit, who had been appointed public Prosecutor for these cases on 18-1-1951. The petition in the Supreme Court had been withdrawn on 16-1-1951, & the stay order had been vacated. The applications for withdrawal in all the five cases were in the same terms, of the Special judge was requested to consent to the withdrawal of the Public Prosecutor from these cases "on the ground of inexpediency of prosecution for reasons of State." The Special judge gave his consent to the withdrawal on 19-1-1951, & thereafter discharged the seven opposite parties other than the State of Rajasthan.

(3.) Mr. S.P. Sinha, learned counsel for Shri Amar Narain, began to argue the petition as if Shri Amar Narain was a party to the cases, whereupon a preliminary objection was raised by Mr. Pathak on behalf of the State of Rajasthan & his contention was that the applicant had no 'locus standi', & this Court should not, therefore, hear his counsel. The argument was that the applicant, Shri Amar Narain, was a complete stranger to the proceedings, & had, therefore, no right to apply to this Court in revision. It was further urged that in a criminal case started at the instance of the State a stranger had no right to apply to this Court in revision when the Public Prosecutor had decided to withdraw from the prosecution.