A.P. Jain, Commercial Manager, Oswal Oil and Vanaspathi Industries, Madras vs Bharat K. Parikh, rep. Oswal Agra Mills Ltd., Madras

Maheswaran, J.—This is an application to quash the order of the 15th Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras, dated 21st October, 1983 issuing

a search warrant to the Inspector of Police, H-6 Police station requiring him to search and seize the account books of the Petitioner and also to

take custody of the goods of the Petitioner. A complaint was filed by one Bharat V. Parikh, Finance and Administrative Officer of Oswal Agro

Mills Ltd., alleging that his company is housed in the premises of one A.P. Jain, Commercial Manager of Oswal Oil and Vanaspathi, that in

accordance with the trade custom necessary licence to store the goods were obtained from the Sales Tax authorities and that the (sic) Petitioner

has been doing business in the said premises and was also holding stocks, but the said Jain used to have overall control of the keys of the locks of

the main gate and without his knowledge no goods could be sent out and that Jam and his son clandestinely removed the stock and

misappropriated the goods and the total value of the stock would be Rs. 2,50,000. That complaint was taken on file by the Magistrate u/s 497 ,

I.P.C. The Petitioner, Jain, has now come up with this application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, alleging that the complainant has procured

a search warrant to search his premises and that the complainant has resorted to criminal proceedings only to defeat his legal claim and prevented

him from taking legal proceedings in respect of recovery of storage charges and charges for supply of three expellers along with accessories. The

contention of the Petitioner is that search warrant has been issued without jurisdiction and the Magistrate did not apply his mind when ordering the

search warrant and no reasons at all were given and that the Magistrate has not applied his mind when ordering search of the premises and no

reasons at all were given.

From the records in this case which have been sent for, I am unable to see whether an application for search warrant was filed at all. The order

of the Magistrate runs thus:

Issue search warrant to the Inspector of Police, H-6 requiring him to search and seize the account books and documents pertaining to the

Petitioner''s concern and also to take custody of the goods of the Petitioner alone or in the alternative, ward off the area in which the goods of the

Petitioner is housed and to seal the same till further orders thereon.

There is no indication in the order whether any application was made by anyone and whether there was any affidavit filed in support of that

application. From the order it is clear that the Magistrate has issued a search warrant without satisfying himself about the necessity therefore. The

order does not contain any reasons, nor does it appear from the records whether the Magistrate has applied his mind before issuing this search

warrant. u/s 93 and also u/s 94 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Magistrate has to exercise his judicial mind and must satisfy himself that it is

absolutely necessary to issue such a warrant. From the order, which is bereft of reasons, I am unable to come to the conclusion that the Magistrate

has exercised his judicial mind.

This view of mine finds support from the ruling in Meyyammal Achi v. Venkatachala Chettiar where Chandra Reddi, J. as he then was, has

quashed a search warrant on the ground that the Magistrate has not given any reason for issuing a search warrant and as it did not appear from the

records that he has exercised his judicial in the mind in the case.

The result is that this petition is allowed. The order of the Magistrate issuing a search warrant is quashed.