Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: 321 crpc in Goverdhan S/O Abhiman Chavan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 31 March, 2010Matching Fragments
Rule. Rule heard forthwith with the consent of counsel for rival parties.
2. The question of law that falls for consideration is, whether power of State Government under Section 321 of Code of Criminal Procedure to withdraw a criminal prosecution is unaffected by fundamental right of a citizen of India.
3. FACTS :
Offence was investigated and charge-sheet under Section 148, 143, 427, 506 and 135 of Bombay Police Act was filed.
On 14.8.2007 Public Prosecutor applied to the trial Court for withdrawal of the prosecution under Section 321 of Code of Criminal Procedure as per the instructions issued by State of Maharashtra. The trial Court rejected the said application by impugned order. Hence this application.
8. It is not in dispute that respondent no.2- Keshav, the complainant, was never heard by the State in the matter. It is true that Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for any notice of hearing to the complainant in a criminal case instituted by the State. However, fundamental right of a citizen, in this case the complainant-victim, to be treated fairly by State certainly must affect the power of the State to act under Section 321 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Principles of natural justice form integral part of Article 14 and includes right to fair treatment. Right to fair treatment is an essential inbuilt of natural justice. The concept of reasonableness and non-arbitrariness pervades the entire constitutional spectrum and is a golden thread which runs through the whole fabric of the constitution. But then it is possible to save it from unconstitutionality by applying the doctrine of reading down looking to the intent of the legislature behind Sec. 321 Cr.P.C. The doctrine of reading down is an internal aid to construe the words or phrase in statute to give reasonable meaning. The object of reading down is to keep the operation of the statute within the purpose of the Act and constitutionally valid. The courts, though have no power to amend the law by process of interpretation, but do have power to amend it so as to be in conformity with the intendment of legislature. Doctrine of reading down is one of the principles of interpretation of statute in that process.