1991 (5) TMI 7 - HC - Income Tax

Court reinstates charge against accused, emphasizing prosecution's prima facie case despite minor deficiencies.

The court reinstated the charge against the accused, overturning the discharge granted by the Additional Sessions judge. The judgment emphasized that a ... False Statement In Verification, Offences And Prosecution Issues:- Discharge of accused based on minor contradictions and deficiencies in prosecution case- Interpretation of 'prima facie case' and 'no case against the accused has been made out'- Significance of evidence in determining a prima facie caseDetailed Analysis:The judgment pertains to Criminal Revisions involving a firm that showed a bogus credit in the name of an individual, Ram Nath, leading to the accusation that another person, Kesho Ram, impersonated as Ram Nath. The Income-tax Officer cross-examined the impersonator, and the firm filed affidavits purportedly signed by Ram Nath. The complainant presented evidence through various witnesses, including proving authorizations and specimen writings. The accused filed revision petitions against the charge framed by the Magistrate, which were initially accepted by the Additional Sessions judge, leading to the present revision petition.The counsel for the petitioner referenced an unreported judgment regarding the interpretation of 'prima facie case' and the standard of proof required for framing a charge. The judgment highlighted that the stage for considering framing a charge involves applying the test of a prima facie case. The court emphasized that a prima facie case is not made out when evidence is unworthy of credit, absurd, or inherently improbable. The court concluded that the prosecution had presented prima facie evidence against the accused, and the Additional Sessions judge erred in discharging the accused based on minor contradictions and deficiencies in the prosecution case.The judgment reinstated the order of the Magistrate, framing the charge against the accused, as the prosecution had successfully established a prima facie case. The court directed the parties to appear before the trial court on a specified date. The decision emphasized the importance of considering the evidence presented by the prosecution in determining a prima facie case and clarified the interpretation of legal standards for framing a charge in criminal proceedings.