NDLI: Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) Sea Customs Act, 1878 (8 of 1878) Imports and Exports (control) Act, 1947 (18 of 1947)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, (5 of 1898) - Charge framed - Whether Magistrate has power to cancel the charge and discharge the accused.'Discharge' and 'Acquittal' - Distinct concepts applicable to different stages of proceedings. The appellant and six others were charged with the offence of entering into criminal conspiracy, with intent to defraud the Government of the duty payable on various contraband goods, etc. and thereby committing offences under s. 120- B I.P.C. read with s. 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act 1878 and s. 5 of the Import and Exports Act 1947. The prosecution alleged that as a result of the criminal conspiracy twenty-four consignments of goods came from abroad and were received in Bombay and it is the case of the prosecution that it has in its possession 10 verladescheins (called as 'mate sheets' or receipts) which give the description of the contraband goods. Out of these 10 verladescheins, 2 relate to consignments of two firms for which the appellant held powers-of-Attorney.The trial Magistrate held that 10 out of the 20 Verladescheins were inadmissible either under the Evidence Act or under the Commercial Documents Evidence Act 1939 and that 9 out of the 10 Verladescheins were admissible under s. 10 of the Evidence Act. He also excluded some other letters and correspondence on the ground that they could not be said to have been written in furtherance of the conspiracy. On the basis of the evidence recorded, the Magistrate framed charges against the appellant and the co-accused. The prosecution as well as the appellant filed revision applications in the High Court. A single Judge of the High Court held that the Magistrate will have to consider afresh whether the documents, which he had admitted under s. 32 or s. 10 of the Evidence Act were admissible or not and also consider whether it was necessary to frame additional charges. After this order, the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate discharged the accused on the grounds that since no overt act was proved against the appellant and certain other accused no conspiracy can be inferred as against them. A Division Bench of the High Court allowed the revision petition filed by the prosecution and held that the Magistrate had no legal power to discharge the accused after framing the charge. In the appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant that in passing the impugned order, the Magistrate was simply acting in consonance with the observations and implied directions contained in the order of the High Court.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.S. Sarkaria
Neutral Citation	1978 INSC 191
Petitioner	Ratilal Bhanji Mithani
Respondent	The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.
SCR	[1979] 1 S.C.R. 993
Judgement Date	1978-09-28
Case Number	95

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. Asstt. Collector of Customs, Bombay & Anr.

Narayanswami Vs. State of Maharashtra

State of Maharashtra Vs. Laxman Jairam

Pandit Ukha Kolhe Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Bhagwanbhai Dulabhai Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra

Jamatraj Kewalji Govani Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Abdul Rajak Murtaja Dafedar Vs. State of Maharashtra

Tapinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. Asstt. Collector of Customs, Bombay & Anr.

Narayanswami Vs. State of Maharashtra

State of Maharashtra Vs. Laxman Jairam

Pandit Ukha Kolhe Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Bhagwanbhai Dulabhai Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra

Jamatraj Kewalji Govani Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Abdul Rajak Murtaja Dafedar Vs. State of Maharashtra

Tapinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.