AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Deepak Verma, J.—This criminal revision u/s 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated October 9, 1995, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore, whereby the charge has been framed against the petitioners u/s 276E read with Section 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
During the course of hearing, learned counsel for petitioners submitted, that the provisions of Section 276E of the Income Tax Act, for which charge has been framed against the petitioners, stands omitted from the statute book with effect from April 1, 1989. He further submitted that on account of this change in law, the learned single judge of this court has been pleased to quash the proceedings in a judgment reported in Harikishan Vs. Union of India (UOI), .
It has further been contended that, even in the said case, challan having been filed subsequent to the deletion of the aforesaid section, cognizance of the same could not have been taken. However, from the record, I find, that challan papers have not been filed. I also find from the impugned order, that the ground which is sought to be attacked in this revision, was not at all taken before the trial court.
Shri Pawanekar, appearing for the respondents, submitted that in the fitness of things the trial court alone would be in a better position to appreciate the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially in view of the judgment of this court passed in the matter of Harikishan Vs. Union of India (UOI), .
Thus, considering the matter, I deem it fit to remand the matter to the trial court for passing a fresh order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, in the light of the judgment passed in the matter of Harikishan Vs. Union of India (UOI), , and also keeping in mind the fact that the provisions of Section 276E of the Income Tax Act stood deleted from the statute book from April 1, 1989.
Since, the matter is old, the trial court is expected to pass an appropriate order at an early date. The parties agree that they would appear before the trial court on April 22, 1999, for further participation in the matter.
With these observations, this revision stands finally disposed of.