WARUBAI KRIPARAM WANI Vs. SHIVSHANKAR BALMUKUND SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application raises a small point under the Village Police Act. The accused was charged under Section 14, which enables the Police Patel to try cases of petty assault or abuse. The applicant made an application stating that she is a very respectable lady and comes from a high family, and asking to be allowed to appear by her pleader. The Police Patel rejected the application on the ground that there is no provision in the Village Police Act for appearance through a pleader. That no doubt is true, but, on the other hand, Section 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code enables any person, accused of an offence before a criminal Court, to be defended by a pleader as of right; and I have no doubt that the Police Patel acting under Section 14 is a criminal Court. Therefore, the accused person has a right to appear through a pleader. But there is no provision in the Village Police Act, corresponding to Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which enables a Magistrate, if he thinks fit, to dispense with the personal attendance of the accused person and permit him to appear by his pleader. Section 17 of the Village Police Act provides, so far as material, that the proceedings under Section 14 shall be oral and held in presence of the parties, and, I think, those words are mandatory. Even if the accused person does appear by a pleader, the proceedings must be in his presence. I think, therefore, that the Police Patel was right in saying that he had no discretion in the matter, and that he could not dispense with the presence of the accused, but wrong in so far as he told that the accused could not engage a pleader.

(2.) THE rule is discharged.