1971 (8) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd 1626 of 1969 by the Munsiff and First Class Magistrate, Chickmagalur. The main question to be decided in these revision petitions is whether the Magistrate was justified in refusing the prayer to recall P. W. 1 to prove the alleged sanction to prosecute the petitioner for offences under section 276C of the Income-tax Act of 1961. In the complaint, the Income-tax Officer mentioned that he had....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t due to inadvertence, sanction obtained to prosecute the accused was not brought to the notice of the court and it was not exhibited for that reason and he requested the court to recall P.W. 1 and examine him to exhibit the sanction in the interest of justice. The learned Magistrate rejected the application filed by the Income-tax Officer holding that the prosecution at the late stage cannot b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the prosecution. It is the duty of the prosecution to bring it to the notice of the court at the relevant point of time that such a sanction is available and that may be looked into before deciding the case. But the reason given in this case is far from satisfactory. Inadvertence is not a reason to hold that the prosecution can, at any stage, recall a witness to produce the sanction. If. inadv....