MANA LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application seeking the revision of the order passed by the Special Judge, Rajasthan, Jaipur City dated the 14th of February, 1969, whereby he held that the Delhi Special Police Establishment had authority to investigate this case and he had jurisdiction to try it.

(2.) A few facts may be stated to appreciate the obections raised by the accused -applicant Manna Lai. He was an Accounts Clerk -cum -Cashier during March and April, 1964, in the office of the Officer Commanding, 57 Rajasthan Battalion N.C.C., at Bikaner. The prosecution alleged that it was his duty to encash bills from the banks and disburse the amounts to the staff and to account for the moneys so received and paid. On the 13th of April, 1964, when the cash box in charge of the applicant was opened it disclosed a shortage of Rs. 1,692,36 and the prosecution says that he had mis -appropriated the amount. The Delhi Police Establishment investigated the case and submitted a report. A criminal case No. 22 of 1965 was registered by the Special Judge, Jaipur City, evidence was led and the defence questioned the validity of the sanction to prosecute, and the plea was sustained and the entire proceedings were quashed on 23 -7 -63. On 31 -8 -68 another charge sheet was submitted with a fresh sanction before the Special Judge No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur. This time the applicant challenged the authority of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to investigate and that of the learned Special Judge over -ruled both the objections and therefore Manna Lal has made this application before this court.

(3.) TWO questions emerge from the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the applicant. The first is whether the statement of Objects and Reasons of a statute can looked into for the purposes of interpreting a given provision of a statute and the second is what is the effect of the 1952 amendment in the Act.