TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (6) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed at that stage, the accused were required to be present in court on December 18,1987, for questioning under section 313(1) Cr. P.C. Thereafter the case had a checkered career, because one after another the accused absconded or filed discharge petitions before the trial court and quash petition before this court and thus till this date, the charges could not be framed against the accused. It is at this stage, the petitioner, A-12, who is none other than the wife of A-1 has filed the petition under section 245 Cr. P.C. to discharge her from the case. In the discharge petition she has contended that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 69 has absolutely no material whatsoever to connect her with any of the offences, much less, for the offences that have been charged against her and none of the documents would connect her with the alleged crime and that there is no iota of material against her and there is no specific case that this petitioner created fictitious persons or documents and the offence alleged against her is only section 120B IPC and the only overt act against her is that the mere act of receiving the cheque mechanically for Rs. 3,690 which was issued to Hindustan Electronics of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents and issue refund orders and that thereby the accused attempted to cheat the Government and income-tax authorities. The further case of the complainant was that after obtaining the income-tax deduction certificates, the accused persons obtained refund orders and encashed them by impersonating the original winners and opening false accounts in banks and took the money for their own use. The offences enumerated in the complaint were under section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 181, 182, 177, 193, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 380, 379, 419, 420 read with section 511 of the IPC. The learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, EOW-I, Chennai dismissed the discharge petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that the same grounds were raised before the High Court in Crl. M.P. No. 4181 of 1988 before this court and the same were rejected by this court by order dated July 14, 1988 (Hema Mohnot v. State by Chief CIT (Admn) [1992] 198 ITR 410), and that the offence alleged against the accused can be proved after cross examination of P.Ws 1 to 69 and other witnesses and according to the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lit up against A-18 to A-20. A-1 filed petition under section 245 Cr. P.C., for dismissal of complaint in M.P. No. 209 of 1988 24-5-1988 On May 24,1988 petition filed by A-1 dismissed. 1988 Crl. M.P. No. 4181/88 filed by Smt. Hema Mohnot, A-12 for quashing and stay granted. 14-7-1988 The above criminal M.P. was dismissed. 1988 Crl. M.P. No. 6457 of 1888 filed by A-11 Meenakumari Mohnot and stay granted The above two orders were passed in Crl. M.P. No. 4181/88 and Crl. M.P. No. 6457/88 reported in Hema Mohnot v. State by Chief CIT (Admn.) [1992] 198 ITR 410 (Mad). 1988 Crl. M.P. No. 4884/88 was filed by A-1 and stay granted. The above criminal revision was dismissed on September 2, 1988, which is reported in (N.K. Mohnot v. Chief CIT (Admn.) [1992] 195 ITR 72 (Mad)). 5-5-1989 The Crl. M.P. No. 6457/88 was dismissed 1989 Crl. O.P. No. 9363/89 filed by N. Mani, A-6 Crl. O.P. No. 7683/91 filed by A-13 Crl. O. P. No. 8990/93 was filed by Harakchand Jain, A-19 and stay granted. 12-1-1994 The above Crl.O.Ps have been dismissed by the High Court with a directio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s petitioner and this has been deposited and encashed by the petitioner through her account. During the search the account books of M/s. Naguasubbiah and company were found in the residential premises of A-5, A-11 and A-12. The false accounts written by the 7th accused in furtherance of the conspiracy stated to be Hassan and Company were found in the residential premises of A-1, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-11 and A-12. Therefore, the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has come to the conclusion that there is a prima facie case existing for framing charges against the petitioner and other accused. What is a prima facie case existing for framing charges against an accused for the offence committed by him has been discussed several times by the hon'ble Supreme Court. In State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa reported in [1996] 4 SCC 659 at page 670, their Lordships have held thus: "30. In Antulay's case [1986] 2 SCC 716 Bhagwati, C.J., opined, after noting the difference in the language of the three pairs of sections, that despite the difference there is no scope for doubt that at the stage at which the court is required to consider the question of framing of charge, the test of 'pri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort. Section 239 reads thus: '239. When accused shall be discharged.- If, upon considering the police report and the documents sent with it under section 173 and making such examination, if any, of the accused as the magistrate thinks necessary and after giving the prosecution and the accused an opportunity of being heard, the magistrate considers the charge against the accused to be groundless, he shall discharge the accused, and record his reasons for so doing.' 9. The said section shows that the magistrate is obliged to record his reasons if he decides to discharge the accused. The next section (section 240) reads thus: '240. Framing of charge.-(1) If, upon such consideration, examination, if any, and hearing, the magistrate is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under this Chapter, which such magistrate is competent to try and which, in his opinion, could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused. (2) The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried.' 10. It is pertinen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....placed before him by the investigating police officer. Even a very strong suspicion founded upon materials before the magistrate, which leads him to form a presumptive opinion as to the existence of the factual ingredients constituting the offence alleged, may justify the framing of charge against the accused in respect of the commission of that offence. In this case there is a strong circumstance to presume that a prima facie case exists against the petitioner (i) as she is the wife of A 1; (ii) several documents were seized from the residential house occupied by her along with her husband; (iii) a cheque for Rs. 3,690 issued in the name of her company has been encashed by her, the said cheque was issued by a fictitious person; (iv) the allegation is that she conspired along with her husband and other accused, of which some of them are employees of the Race Club to dupe the Income-tax Department for the purpose of making unlawful gain by producing bogus tax deducted at source certificates or original tax deducted at source certificates in the name of fictitious persons by opening bank accounts in the name of fictitious persons in different banks and therefore, it cannot be easi....