minal Appeal No 218 of 1966
Appeal by special leave from the order dated August 5 1966 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Revision No 1020 of 966 AND Criminal Appeal No 238 of 1966
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 13 1966 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Revi sion No 40 of 1965
B P Jha and Subhag Mal Jain for the appellants in Cr A No 218 of 1966
Nuruddin Ahmed and R C Prasad for the appellants in Cr A No 238 of 1966
U P Singh for the respondents in both the appeals
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam J
The common question that arises for con sideration in these two criminal appeals by special leave is as to whether a Magistrate can direct the police to submit a charge sheet when the police after the investigation into a congnizable offence had submitted a final report under section 173 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure hereinafter called the Code
There is a conflict of opinion on this point between the various High Courts in India
The High Courts of Madras Calcutta Madhya Pradesh Assam and Gujarat have taken the view that the Magistrate has no such power whereas the Patna and Bombay High Courts have held a contrary view
In Criminal Appeal No 218 of 1966 the respondent Dinesh Mishra lodged a first information report on June 3 670 1965 at the Rajoun Police Station that he saw a thatched house of one Uma Kant Misra situated on the northern side of his house burning and the petitioners herein running away from the scene
The police made an investigation and submitted what is called a final report  under section 173 1 of the Code to the effect that the offence complained of was false
The Sub Divisional Magistrate received this report on July 13 1965 but in the meanwhile the respondent had filed what is termed a protest petition  challenging the correctness of the report submitted by the police
The Magistrate appears to have perused the police diary and after hearing the counsel for the respondent and the public prosecutor passed an order on October 27 1965 directing the police to submit a charge sheet against the petitioners herein
The petitioners challenged this order without success both before the learned Sessions Judge Bhagalpur and the Patna High Court
It was held by the High Court following its previous decision that the Magistrate has jurisdiction to call for a charge sheet when he disagrees with the report submitted by the police under section 1731 of the Code
The petitioners in this appeal challenge these orders
Similarly in Criminal Appeal No 238 of 1966 the second respondent therein had lodged a written report on February 24
1964 before the police at Malsalami police station that his daughter Hiramani was missing from February 21 1964 and that the appellants in that appeal had kidnapped her
A case under section 366 IPC was registered against them
The police after investigation submitted a final report to the Magistrate
to the effect that the girl concerned had been recovered and that she bad stated that she had of her own accord eloped and therefore the police stated that the case might be treated as closed
The second respondent filed a protest petition  in Court challenging the statements of the police and he also filed a complaint under section 498 IPC
The Magistrate after a perusal of the case diary of the police and hearing the lawyer for the appellants and the second respondent as also the public prosecutor passed an order directing the investigating officer to submit a charge sheet against the accused persons under section 366 IPC This order has been confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge as well as the Patna High Court
Here also the Patna High Court in accordance with its previous decision held that the Magistrate had jurisdiction to pass the order in question
All these orders are challenged by the appellants in this appeal
On behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No 218 of 1966 Mr Jha learned counsel pointed out that when a final report is submitted by the police under section 1731 of the Code 6 71 stating that no case is made out the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to direct the police to file a charge sheet
It may be open counsel points out to the Magistrate to direct further investigation to be made by the police or to treat the protest petition filed by the second respondent as a complaint and take cognizance of the offence and proceed according to law
 The scheme of Chapter XIV of the Code counsel points out clearly indicates that the formation of an opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused on trial is that of the investigating officers and the Magistrate cannot compel the police to form a particular opinion on the investigation and to submit a report according to such opinion
In this case there is nothing to show that the protest petition filed by the second respondent has befell treated as a complaint in which case it may be open to the Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence but in the absence of any such procedure being adopted according to counsel the order of the Magistrate directing a charge sheet to be filed is illegal and not warranted by the provisions of the Code
These contentions have been adopted and reiterated by Mr Nuruddin Ahmed on behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No 238 of 1966
Both the learned counsel pressed before us for acceptance the views as expressed by the Gujarat High Court in its Full Bench judgment reported as State of Gujarat vs Shah Lakhamshi1
On the other hand Mr U P Singh learned counsel for the respondent in Criminal Appeal No 218 of 1966 has pointed out that the Magistrate has jurisdiction in proper cases when he does not agree with the final report submitted by the police to direct them to submit a charge sheet
Otherwise counsel points out the position will be that the entire matter is left to the discretion of the police authorities and the Courts will be powerless even when they feel that the action of the police is not justified
Quite naturally counsel prays for acceptance of the views expressed by the dissenting Judges in A K Roy vs State of W B 2 and by the Bombay and Patna High Courts in the decisions reported as State vs Murlidhar Govardhan3 and Ram Nandan vs State  4   respectively
In order properly to appreciate the duties of the police in the matter of investigation of offences as well as their powers it is necessary to refer to the provisions contained in Chapter XIV of the Code
That chapter deals with Information to the Police and their Powers to investigate  and it contains the group of section beginning from section 154 and ending with section 176
Section 154 deals with information relating to the commission of a cognizable R 1966 Guj 283
2 A 1
R B
3 A 1
R 4 A 1
R 1966 Pat
67 2 offence and the procedure to be adopted in respect of the same
Section 155 similarly deals with information in respect of noncognizable offences
Sub section
2 of this section prohibits a police officer from investigating a non cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate
Section 156 authorizes a police officer in charge of a police station to investigate any cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate
Therefore it wilt be seen that large powers are conferred on the police in the matter of investigation into a cognizable offence
Sub section
3 of section 156 provides for any Magistrate empowered under section 190 to order an investigation
In cases where a cognizable offence is suspected to have been committed the officer in charge of a police station after sending a report to the Magistrate is entitled under section 157 to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and also to take steps for the discovery and arrest of the offender
Clause b of the proviso to section 1571 gives a discretion to the police officer not to investigate the case if it appears to him that there is no sufficient ground for entering on an investigation
Section 158 deals with the procedure to be adopted in the matter ofa report to be sent under section 157
Section 159 gives power to a Magistrate on receiving a report under section 157 either to direct an investigation or himself or through another Magistrate subordinate to him to hold a preliminary enquiry into the matter or otherwise dispose of the case in accordance with the Code
Sections 160 to 163 deal with the power of the police to require attendance of witnesses examine witnesses and record statements
Sections 165 and 166 deal with the power of police officers in the matter of conducting searches during an investigation in the circumstances mentioned therein
Section 167 provides for the procedure to be adopted by the police when investigation cannot be completed in 24 hours
Section 168 provides for a report being sent to the officer incharge of a police station about the result of an investigation when such investigation has been made by a subordinate police officer under Chapter XIV
Section 169 authorises a police officer to release a person from custody on his executing a bond to appear if and when so required before a Magistrate in cases when on investigation under Chapter XIV it appears to the officer in charge of the police station or to the police officer making the investigation that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a Magistrate
Section 170 empowers the officer incharge of a police station after investigation under Chapter XIV and if it appears to him that there is sufficient evidence to forward the accused under custody to a competent Magistrate or to take securtiy from the accused for his appearance before the Magistrate in cases where the offence is bailable
Section 172 makes it obligatory on the police officer making an investigation to maintain a diary recording the various particulars therein and in the 673 manner indicated in that section
Section 173 provides for an investigation under Chapter XIV to be completed without unnecessary delay and also makes it obligatory on the officer incharge of the police station to send a report to the Magistrate concerned in the manner provided for therein containing the necessary particulars
It is now only necessary to refer to section 190 occurring in Chapter XV relating to jurisdiction of criminal Courts in inquiries and trials
That section is to be found under the heading Conditions requisite for initiation of proceedings  and its sub section 1 is as follows  1 Except as hereinafter provided any Presidency Magistrate District Magistrate or Sub divisional Magistrate and any other Magistrate specially empowered in this behalf may take cognizance of any offence a upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence b upon a report in writing of such facts made by any police officer c upon information received from any person other than a police officer or upon his own knowledge or suspicion that such offence has been committed
 From the foregoing sections occurring in Chapter XIV it will be seen that very elaborate provisions have been made for securing that an investigation does take place into a reported offence and the investigation is carried out within the limits of the law without causing any harassment to the accused and is also completed without unnecessary or undue delay
But the point to be noted is that the manner and method of conducting the investigation are left entirely to the police and the Magistrate so far as we can see has no power under any of these provisions to interfere with the same
If on investigation it appears to the officer in charge of a police station or to the officer making an investigation that here is no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds of suspicion justifying the forwarding of an accused to a Magistrate section 169 says that the officer shall release the accused if in custody on hi  executing a bond to appear before the Magistrate
Similarly if on the other hand it appears to the officer in charge of a police station or to the officer making the investigation under Chapter XIV that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground to justify the forwarding of an accused to a Magistrate such an officer is required under section 170 to forward the accused to a Magistrate or if the offence is bailable to take security from him for his appearance before such Magistrate
But whether a case comes under section 169 or under section 170 of the Code on the completion of the investigation the police officer has to L7SupCI67 13 674 submit a report to the Magistrate under section 173 in the manner indicated therein containing the various details
The question as to whether the Magistrate has got power to direct the police to file a charge sheet on receipt of a report under section 173 really depends upon the nature of the jurisdiction exercised by a Magistrate on receiving a report
In this connection we may refer to certain observations made by the Judicial Committee in King Emperor vs Khwaja Nazir Ahmed1 and by this Court in H N Rishbud and Inder Singh vs The State of Delhi2
In Nazir Ahmed s Case1 Lord Porter observes at 212 as follows Just as it is essential that every one accused of a crime should have free access to a court of justice so that he may be duly acquitted if found not guilty of the offence with which he is charged so it is of the utmost importance that the judiciary should not interfere with the police in matters which are within their province and into which the law imposes on them the duty of inquiry
In India as has been shown there is a statutory right on the part of the police to investigate the circumstances of an alleged cognizable crime without requiring any authority from the judicial authorities and it would as their Lordships think be an unfortunate result if it should be held possible to interfere with those statutory rights by an exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of the court
The functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary not overlapping and the combination of individual liberty with a due observance of law and order is only to be obtained by leaving each to exercise its own function always of course subject to the right of the court to intervene in an appropriate case when moved under section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code to give directions in the nature of habeas corpus
In such a case as the present however the court s functions begin when a charge is preferred before it and not until then
 These observations have been quoted with approval by this Court in State of West Bengal vs section N Basak3
This Court in Rishbud and Inder Singh s Case1 observes at p 1156 as follows  Investigation usually starts on information relating to the commission of an offence given to an officer incharge of a police station and recorded under sec 1 L R 71 1
A 203
2 3 A 1
R 675 tion 154 of the Code
If from information so received or otherwise the officer in charge of the police station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence he or some other subordinate officer deputed by him has to proceed to the spot to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and if necessary to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender
Thus investigation primarily consists in the ascertainment or the facts and circumstances of the case
By definition it includes all the proceedings under the Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer 
 Again after a reference to some of the provisions in Chapter XIV of the Code it is observed at p 1157 Thus under the Code investigation consists generally of the following steps  1 Proceeding to the spot 2 Ascertainment of the facts and circumstances of the case 3 Discovery and arrest of the suspected offender 4 Collection of evidence relating to the commission of the offence which may consist of a the examination of various persons including the accused and the reduction of their statements into writing if  the officer thinks fit b the search of places of seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and to be produced at the trial and 5 Formation of the opinion as to whether on the material collected there is a case to place the accused before a Magistrate for trial and if so taking the necessary steps for the same by filing of a charge sheet under section 1 7 3 
It is also clear that the final step in the investigation viz the formation of the opinion as to whether or no  there is a case to place the accused on trial is to be that of the officer in charge of the police station
 We are referring to these observations for the purpose of emphasizing that the scheme of Chapter XIV clearly shows that the formation of an opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused on trial has been left to the officer incharge of a police station
Bearing in mind these principles referred to above we have to consider the question that arises for consideration in this case
The High Courts which have held that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to call upon the police to file a charge sheet under such circumstances have Tested their decision on two principles viz a that there is no express provision in the Code empowering a Magistrate to pass such an order and b such a power in view of the scheme of L7SUPCI67 14 676 Chapter XIV cannot be inferred vide Venkata Subha v Anjanayulu1 Abdul Rahim vs Abdul Muktadin2 Aman Premanand vs State3 the majority view in A K Roy vs State of W B1 and Stale of Gujarat vs Shah Lakhamshi5
Or the other hand the High Courts which have recognised such a power rest their decision again on two grounds viz a where a report is submitted by the police after investigation the Magistrate has to deal with it judicially which will mean that where the report is not accepted the Magistrate can give suitable directions to the police  and b the Magistrate is given supervision over the conduct of investigation by the police and there ore such a power can be recognised in the Magistrate vide State vs Murlidhar Goverdhan6 and Ram Nandan vs State7
Though it may be that a report submitted by the police may have to be dealt with judicially by a Magistrate and although the Magistrate may have certain supervisory powers nevertheless we are not inclined to agree with the further view that from these considerations alone it can be said that when the police submit a report that no case has been made out for sending up an accused for trial it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to file a charge sheet
But we may make it clear that this is not to say that the Magistrate is absolutely powerless because as will be indicated later it is open to him lo take cognizance of an offence and proceed according to law
We do not also find any such power under section 1733 as is sought to be inferred in some of the decisions cited above
As we have indicated broadly the approach made by the various High Courts in coming to different conclusions we do not think it necessary to refer to those decisions in detail
It will be seen that the Code as such does not use the ex pression charge sheet  or final report 
But it is understood in the Police Manual containing Rules and Regulations that a report by the Police filed under section 170 of the Code is referred to as a charge sheet 
But in respect of the reports sent under section 169 ie when there is no sufficient evidence to justify the forwarding of the accused to a Magistrate it is termed variously in different States as either referred charge  final report  or Summary 
In these two appeals which are from the State of Bihar the reports under section 169 are referred to as final report 
Now the question as to what exactly is to be done by a Magistrate on receiving a report
under section 173 will have to be considered
That report may be inrespect of a case coming under section 170 1 AIR 1932 Mad 673
2 AIR 1953 Assam 112
3 AIR 1960 M P 12
4 AIR 1962 Cal
5 AIR 1966 Guj
6 AIR 1960 Born
7 AIR 1966 Pat
677 or one coming under section 169
We have already referred to section 190 which is the first section in the group of sections headed Conditions requisite for Initiation of Proceedings  Sub section
1 of this section will cover a report sent under section 173
The use of the words may take cognizance of any offence  in sub section
1 of section 190 in our opinion imports the exercise of a judicial discretion  and the Magistrate who receives the report under section 173 will have to consider the said report and judicially take a decision whether or not to take cognizance of the offence
From this it follows that it is not as if that the Magistrate is bound to accept the opinion of the police that there is a case for placing the accused on trial
It is open to the Magistrate to take the view that the facts disclosed in the report do not make out an offence for taking cognizance or he may take the view that there is no sufficient evidence to justify an accused being put on trial
On either of these grounds the Magistrate will be perfectly justified in declining to take cognizance of an offence irrespective of the opinion of the police
On the other hand if the Magistrate agrees with the report which is a charge sheet submitted by the police no difficulty whatsoever is caused because he will have full jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence under section 1901b of the Code
This will be the position when the report under section 173 is a charge sheet
Then the question is what is the position when the Magis trate is dealing with a report submitted by the police under section 173 that no case is made out for sending up an accused for trial which report as we have already indicated is called in the area in question as a final report  Even in those cases if the Magistrate agrees with the said report he may accept the final report and close the proceedings
But there may be instances when the Magistrate may take the view on a consideration of the final report that the opinion formed by the police is not based on a full and complete investigation in which case in our opinion the Magistrate will have ample jurisdiction to give directions to the police under section 1 5 6  3  to make a further investigation
That is if the Magistrate feels after considering the final report that the investigation is unsatisfactory or incomplete or that there is scope for further investigation it will be open to the Magistrate to decline to accept the final report and direct the police to make further investigation under section 1563
The police after such further investigation may submit a charge sheet or again submit a final report depending upon the further investigation made by them
If ultimately the Magistrate forms the opinion that the facts set out in the final report constitute an offence he can take cognizance of the offence under section 1901 c notwithstanding the contrary opinion of the police expressed in the final report
678 In this connection the provisions of section 169 of the Code are relevant
They specifically provide that even though on investigation a police officer or other investigating officer is of the opinion that there is no case for proceeding against the accused he is bound While releasing the accused to take a bond from him to appear If and
when required before a Magistrate
This provision is obviously to meet a contingency of the Magistrate when he considers the report of the investigating officer and judicially takes a view different from the police
We have to approach the question arising for consideration in this case in the light of the circumstances pointed out above
We have already referred to the scheme of Chapter XXIV as well as the observations of this Court in Rishbud and Inder Singh s Case1 that the formation of the opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused on trial before a Magistrate is left to the officer in charge of the police station
There is no express power so far as we can see which gives jurisdiction to pass an order of the nature under attack nor can any such powers be implied
There is certainly no obligation on the Magistrate to accept the report if he does not agree with the opinion formed by the police
Under those circumstances if he still suspects that an offence has been committed he is entitled notwithstanding the opinion of tile police to take cognizance under section 1901c of the Code
That provision in our opinion is obviously intended to secure that offences may not go unpunished and justice may be in voked even where persons individually aggrieved are unwilling or unable to prosecute
or the police either wantonly or through bona fide error fail to submit a report setting out the facts constituting the offence
Therefore a very wide power is conferred on the Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence
not only when he receives information about the commission of an offence from a third person but also where he has knowledge or even suspicion that the offence has been committed
It is open to the Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence under section 1901 c on the ground that after having due regard to the final report and the police records placed before him be has reason to suspect that an offence has been committed
Therefore these circumstances will also clearly negative the power of a Magistrate to call for a charge sheet from the police when they have submitted a final report
The entire scheme of Chapter XIV clearly indicates that the formation of the opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused for trial is that of the officer in charge of the police station and that opinion determines whether the report is to be under section 170 being a charge sheet  or under section 169 a final report 
It is no 1 19551 SCR 1150
67 9 doubt open to the Magistrate as we have already pointed out to accept or disagree with the opinion of the police and if he disagrees he is entitled to adopt any one of the courses indicated by us
But he cannot direct the police to submit a charge sheet because the submission of the report depends upon the opinion formed by the police and not on the opinion of the Magistrate
The Magistrate cannot compel the police to form a particular opinion on the investigation and to submit a report according to such opinion
Thai will be really encroaching on the sphere of the police and compelling the police to form an opinion so as to accord with the decision of the Magistrate and send a report either under section 169 or under section 170 depending upon the nature of the decision
Such a function has been left to the police under the Code
We have already pointed out that the investigation under the Code takes in several aspects and stages ending ultimately with the formation of an opinion by the police as to whether on the material covered and collected a case is made out to place the accused before the Magistrate for trial and the submission of either a charge sheet or a final report is dependent on the nature of the opinion so formed
The formation of the said opinion by the police as pointed out earlier is the final step in the investigation and that final step is to be taken only by the police and by no other authority
The question can also be consider from another point of view
Supposing the police send a report viz a charge sheet under section 170 of the Code
As we have already pointed out the Magistrate is not bound to accept that report when he considers the matter judicially
But can he differ from the police
and call upon them to submit a final report under s169  In our opinion the Magistrate has no such power
If he has no such power in law it also follows that the Magistrate has no power to direct the police to submit a charge sheet when the police have submitted a final report that no case is made out for sending the accused for trial
The functions of the Magistracy and the police are entirely different and though in the circumstances mentioned earlier the Magistrate may or may not accept the report and take suitable action according to law he cannot certainly infringe upon the jurisdiction of the police by compelling them to change their opinion so as to accord with his view
Therefore to conclude there is no power expressly or im pliedly conferred under the Code on a Magistrate to call upon the police to submit a charge sheet when they have sent a report under section 169 of the Code that there is no case made out for sending tip an accused for trial
L7 Sup
CI67 15 680 In these two appeals one other fact will have to be taken note of
It is not very clear as to whether the Magistrate in each of these cases has chosen to treat the protest petitions filed by the respective respondents as complaints because we do not find that the Magistrate has adopted the suitable procedure indicated in the Code when he takes cognizance of an offence on a complaint made to him
Therefore while holding that the orders of the Magistrate in each of these cases directing the police to file charge sheets is Without jurisdiction we make it clear that it is open to the Magistrate to treat the respective protest petitions as complaints and take further proceedings according to law and in the light of the views expressed by us in this judgment
Mr Nuruddin Ahmed learned counsel for the appellants in Criminal Appeal No 238 of 1966 particularly urged that it is unnecessary to direct further proceedings to be continued so far as his clients are concerned
Learned counsel pointed out that the police report before the Magistrate clearly shows that the girl in question who is stated to be above 19 years of age has herself stated that she bad eloped of her own accord and that if that is so further proceedings against his clients are absolutely unnecessary to be continued
We are not inclined to accept these contentions of the learned counsel
As to whether an offence is made out or whether any of the appellants or both of them are guilty of the offences with which they may be charged are all matters which do not require to be considered by this Court at this stage
In the result subject to the directions contained above the orders of the Magistrate directing the police to file a charge will be set aside and the appeals allowed to that extent
VPS Appeals allowed


Summary:
On the question whether a magistrate could direct the police to submit a charge sheet when the police after investigation into a cognizable offence had submitted a report of the action taken under section 169 Cr PC that there was no case made out for sending up the accused for trial HELD  There was no such power conferred on a magistrate either expressly or by implication
When a cognizable offence is reported to the police they may after investigation take action under section 169 or section 170 Cr
If the police think there is not sufficient evidence against the accused they may under section 169 release the accused from custody on his executing a bond to appear before a competent magistrate if and when so required or if the police think there is sufficient evidence they may under section 170 forward the accused under custody to a competent magistrate or release the accused on bail in cases where the offences are bailable
In either case the police should submit a report of the action taken under section 173 to the competent magistrate who considers it judicially under section 190 and takes the following action  1 If the report is a charge sheet under section 170 it is open to the magistrate to agree with it and take cognizance of the offence under section 1901 b or to take the view that the facts disclosed do not make out an offence and decline to take cognizance
But he cannot call upon the police to submit a report that the accused need not be proceeded against on the ground that there was not sufficient evidence
2 If the report is of the action taken under section 169 then the magistrate may agree with the report and close the proceeding
If he disagrees with the report he can give directions to the police under section 1563 to make a further investigation
If the police after further investigation submit a charge sheet the magistrate may follow the procedure where the charge sheet under section 170 is filed but if the police are still of the opinion that there was not sufficient evidence against the accused the magistrate may agree or disagree with it
Where he agrees the case against the accused is closed
Where the magistrate disagrees and forms the opinion that the facts set out in the report constitute an offence he can take cognizance under section 1901c
The provision in section 169 enabling the Police to take a bond for the appearance of the accused before a magistrate if so required is to meet such a contingency of the magistrate taking cognizance of the offence notwithstanding the contrary opinion of the police
The power under section 1901c was intended to Secure that 66 9 offences may not go unpunished and justice may be invoked even where persons individually aggrieved are unwilling or unable to prosecute or he police either wantonly or through a bona fide error do not submit a charge sheet
But the magistrate cannot direct the Police to submit a charge sheet because the submission of the report depends entirely upon the opinion formed by the police and not on the opinion of the magistrate
The magistrate if he disagrees with the report of the police can
himself take cognizance of the offence under section 19O1a or c but be cannot compel the police to form a particular opinion on investigation and submit a report according to such opinion
672F H 673B 676H 677B H 678 A H 679A C E H State of Gujarat vs Shah Lakhamshi AIR 1966 Gujarat 283 FB Venkatusubha vs Anjanayulu AIR 1932 Mad 673 Abdul Rahim vs Abdul Muktadin AIR 1953 Assam 112 Amar Premanand vs State AIR 1960 MP 12 and A K Roy vs State of West Bengal AIR 1962 Cal
135 FB approved
State vs Murlidhar Govardhan AIR 1960 Bom
240 and Ram Wandan vs State AIR 1966 Pat
438 disapproved