Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The next objection taken by the learned counsel against the maintainability of this civil revision petition was on the ground that the respondent in the original petition was bound to answer the interrogatories as it was intended to simplify the matters before the actual trial of the petition took place; and that as a matter of fact, all the questions that have been included in the interrogatories to be administered to the respondent in the original petition are quite simple and do not lead to any complications; and that it was within the power of the election tribunal to order such interrogatories.

A reading of the interrogatories would certainly indicate that these interrogatories are not so innocent and so simple as the learned counsel would appear to make them. That the respondent is not bound to answer the interrogatories which are likely to lead into an incrimination of himself in any criminal offence, has been held in several cases of the English as well as the Indian courts. Suffice it for me to refer to only two decisions of the English cases reported in Queen's Bench Division Vol. II and X. The first decision is in Atherley v. Harvey, 1876-2 QBD 524, where it has been held :

The third Judge also concurred with the other two Judges. In Lamb v. Munster, 1882-10 QBD 110 at p. 111, it was held, "An objection to answer interrogatories which is made by affidavit on the ground of the tendency of the answer to criminate the person interrogated may be valid, although not expressed in any precise form of words, if, from the nature of the question and the circumstances, such a tendency seems likely or probable. In an action for libel the defendant pleaded a denial of the publication, and to interrogatories asking him, in effect, whether he published the libel he stated by his affidavit in answer; 'I decline to answer all the interrogatories upon the ground that my answer to them 'might' tend to criminate me."

17. Whether Respondent/defendant no.1 could be directed as has been refused by the learned lower court is found fully answered in the case of Thakur Prasad v. Md. Sohayal as reported in AIR 1977 Patna 233 wherein it has been held:-

2. That may be one of the grounds, but in my opinion there is yet another and stronger ground to maintain the order. The right of making discovery and inspection is given under O. XI of the Civil P. C. The main object of interrogatories is to save expenses and time by enabling a party to obtain from his opponent information as to facts material to the questions in dispute between them and to obtain admissions of any facts which he has to prove on any issue which is raised between them. An admission of the adversary will serve to maintain the case of the party administering the inter-rogatory or the answer might be destruc-tive of his own case. A party therefore who has not chosen to appear in the case and contest the plaintiff's suit can-not be asked either to discover any document or to answer any question on interrogatories. This view also seems to in keeping with the penal clause pro-vided under R. 21 of O. XI which pro-vides that where any party fails to com-ply with any order to answer interrogatories, or for discovery or inspection of his suit dismissed for want of prosecu-tion, and, if a defendant, to have his defence, if any, struck out, and to be placed in the same position as if he had not defended, this penalty cannot be visited to a defendant who has not chosen to appear to contest a suit. Although there does not appear to be any decision of any High Court of India, to me on con-sideration of the entire scheme of the Order, it appears that interrogatories as a general rule should not be served until after the defence is filed as until then, it is not possible to fix the area of the controversy between the parties and the very purpose of this provision cannot be fulfilled.