Skip to content


State of Gujarat Vs. Soni Champaklal Somabhai - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Ref. No. 47 of 1965
Judge
Reported inAIR1965Guj246; 1965CriLJ497; (1964)GLR981
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 161, 161(3), 173(4) and 251A (7)
AppellantState of Gujarat
RespondentSoni Champaklal Somabhai
Advocates: A.D. Desai, Asst. Govt. Pleader
Excerpt:
.....the status of the concerned person as a workman from both the establishments, but while granting and moulding the reliefs the court will take these facts into consideration. - the failure to comply with the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 173 of the cr. the failure to comply with the provisions of sub-section (4) of s......refusing to allow the prosecution to examine its witness one mr. goehel, p.s.i, be set aside. the learned magistrate refused permission to the prosecution to examine the witness on the ground that the statement was not supplied to the accused as required by section 173 of the cr.p.code.(2) if we turn to section 251-a of the cr. p.code, it is clear that the magistrate is bound to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. at the same time, we must remember the provision of sub-s. (4) section 171 of the cr. p.code. under that sub-section the police are bound to give copies of all statement recorded under the sub-section (3) of section 161 of the cr. p.code of all persons whom the prosecution must as its witnesses. ordinarily, the prosecution must record the.....
Judgment:
ORDER

(1) learned Sessions Judge, Broach, recommends that the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jambusar, refusing to allow the prosecution to examine its witness one Mr. Goehel, P.S.I, be set aside. The learned Magistrate refused permission to the prosecution to examine the witness on the ground that the statement was not supplied to the accused as required by section 173 of the Cr.P.Code.

(2) If we turn to section 251-A of the Cr. P.Code, it is clear that the Magistrate is bound to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. At the same time, we must remember the provision of sub-s. (4) section 171 of the Cr. P.Code. Under that sub-section the police are bound to give copies of all statement recorded under the sub-section (3) of section 161 of the Cr. P.Code of all persons whom the prosecution must as its witnesses. Ordinarily, the prosecution must record the statements of all witnesses whom it proposes to examine as its witnesses. In this case, however, no statement of Mr. Gohel under S. 161 of the Cr. P.Code has been recorded. The failure to comply with the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 173 of the Cr. P.Code cannot affect the provisions of sub-section (7) of S. 251-a of the hearing, the Magistrate shall proceed in support of the prosecution. The provisions in section 173 of the Cr. P.Code, requiring the police to give copies of statements to the accused has been simplified. The failure to comply with the provisions of sub-section (4) of S.173 of the Cr. P. Code may affect the value of evidence. But, it cannot affect the mandatory character of sub-section (7) of section 215-a, which provides as under:

'On the date so fixed, the Magistrate shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution'.

(3) The order of the learned Magistrate is, therefore, set aside and he is directed to allow the prosecution to examine Mr. Gohel as a witness. It is open to the Magistrate to attach any value he thinks proper to the evidence of Mr.Gohel.

(4) AI/ AGJ/ V.B.B.

(5) Reference accepted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //