AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.R. Majithia, J.
This order will dispose of Crl. M. No. 6075M of 1989.
The petitioners are arrayed and accused in the complaint under Sections 12B 420, 468, 471 IPC and under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (c) Act, 1947, filed by the Deputy Chief Controller (Exports & Imports) Act, 1947. They were allowed exemption from personal appearance in the said complaint. On 27.7.1989, the complaint came up for hearing, neither the accused, namely Parkash Chand Aggarwal and Prem Parshad nor their counsel put in appearance and the learned Magistrate passed the following order :
"Present : Spl, PP for the CBI.
Miss Veena Gupta, Accused in person on bail.
Sh. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate counsel for accused Vinod Kedia and Y.K. Gupta accused No. 6 and Shri R.P.S. Rana advocate counsel for accused P.C. Aggarwal Sh. Brijesh Chopra, Advocate counsel for accused No. 2 to 4 Magety Prahlad Rao, Majety Surendra Nath and Majety Ram Chandra Rao.
Accused Parkash Chand Aggarwal and Prem Parshad are absent. Their bail orders are cancelled and bonds are forfeited to the State. They be summoned through non bailable warrants with notice to sureties for the next date.
"The exemption of all the accused is cancelled and they are directed to be produced through their counsel in the Court on the next date. To come up for consideration on 11.8.1989."
The later part of the impugned order regarding this liable to be set aside. The counsel for the petitioners was very much there as per the direction of the Court whereby the exemption from personal appearance was granted to them.
Though the fault was of the coaccused of the petitioners yet the petitioners have been penalised. They have not violated the terms of the concession granted to them under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. With these backdrops of the facts, I set aside the later part of the impugned order.
JUDGMENT accordingly.