AJIT KURANAKARAN MENON Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicants are presently facing Sessions Case No.72 of 1999 which is presently pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge at Palghar. The applicants herein filed Misc. Application at Exhibit 3 before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Palghar for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. In the said Sessions Case the applicants came to be arrested for charge under Section 395 and 171 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution in gist is as follows:

(2.) On 11th February, 1993 a truck containing certain chemical substances left Bombay to go to Ankleshwar and on Bombay Ahmedabad Road at Pelhar Phata certain persons with Khaki clothes on their person arranged to stop the said truck and thereafter the driver of the truck and the cleaner were made to sit in a fiat car and taken away in the said car. The truck in which the chemical was lying was also taken away. The applicants were arrested under Section 395 and 171 of I.P.C. The present applicants came to be arrested in connection with the said crime and were prosecuted as aforesaid. The present applicants filed the application for discharge which came to be rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Palghar by an Order dated 4th January, 2001. Being aggrieved by the said Order dated 4th January, 2001, the applicants herein have filed this revision application.

(3.) I have heard learned Advocate Ms. Bhojane for the applicants and Ms. Jhaveri for the State. Learned Advocate Ms. Bhojane submitted that in the first place the impugned Order dated 4th January, 2001 is sketchy in as much as the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge before whom the application under Section 227 was heard and disposed of has not specifically mentioned the material on the basis of which he came to the conclusion that prima facie case is made out against the present applicants. She submitted that bear reference to the memorandum statement purported to have been given by the co-accused is used against the present applicants. According to her the impugned Order is clearly without application of mind and does not spell out specific material which was considered as a material on the basis of which the prosecution made out a case for saying that the applicants were concerned in the offences alleged against them. She had taken me through the entire chargesheet and has submitted that there is no whisper against the present applicants which could be considered as the appropriate material to hold that prima facie case was made out against the applicants. She submitted that the application under Section 227 ought to be granted by this Court and the present applicants are required to be discharged.