The duty of the Court to question the accused for the purpose of enabling him to explain the circumstances appearing in evidence against him and the importance of a proper examination of the accused under Section 342, Criminal P. C.

JUDGMENT

Sen, J. - The appellant has been convicted of having committed an offence punishable under. Section 7,(1) of Act xxiv [24] of 1946, that is to say of having sold paper above the price fixed by the Government of India and has been sentenced to pay a fine of us. 1000 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. The case against the appellant briefly is this: The appellant is a dealer in paper. On 4th March 1948, Sub Inapector Sarkar of the Enforcement Branob sent a teat purchaser Bajrangi. Jal with marked notes to purchase paper from the acoused. The accused is alleged to have charged Es. 83 for three reams of paper although the controlled rate was ks. 5 5-0 per ream. as soon as the purchase was made the Sub-Inspector came into the shop, seized the paper, made a search and then sent up the accused for trial. The defence of the accused is that ha did not sell any paper at all and that he took an advance of En. S3 from the purchaser for supplying a special kind of paper namely oiled paper. I should mention here that the price of an. 5-3-0 per ream is fixed for foolscap paper. There is apparently no fixed price for oiled paper. The learned Magistrate has disbelieved the defence and convicted the accused.

3. Having regard to the decision at which I have arrived it will not be necessary for me to deal with the evidence. For certain reasons the order of conviction and sentence must be set aside and the case muat be sent back for retrial. The first reason is that the accused has not been examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 342, Criminal P. C. From the resord this is all that appears: "Statement of accused u/s 842, Criminal P, C. The acoused says that he will file a written statement bat will adduce defence," This is how the learned Magistrate has sought to comply with the provisions of Section 342, Criminal I. C. Now it has been laid down in a series of Ciises and indeed it follows from the words of the auction itself that it is the duty of the Court u/s 342, Criminal P. C., to question the accused for the purpose of enabling him to explain the circumstances appearing in evidence against him. There is no record of what questions were pat by the Court to the accused. Merely asking the accused if ho has anything to asy is certainly not a compliance with the provisions of Section 845, Criminal P. C. The record must show that the Court put questions to the accused as would enable the accused to explain the circumstances which appear against him. It is not necessary for the Court to put every detail of the evidence before the accused, but the broad facts of the case against the accused should be put to him by the Court, and the Court should ask the ac-cusad whether he would like to explain the circumstances which appear against him. There was thus not a proper examination of the accused u/s 842, Criminal P. C.

4. Secondly, I would point out that a written statement of the accused is no substitute for an examination under 8. 842, Criminal P. C. In this connection I would refer to the observations of Eankin J. as he then was, in the case of Promotha Nath Mukhopadhya Vs. Emperor, AIR 1923 Cal 470 The observations appear at page 522. His Lordship said:

The intention of the statute is that 'at a certain stage in the case' the Court itaelf shall put aside all Counsel, all pleaders, all witnesses, all representatives, and shall call upon each individual accused with the" autherityof the Court's own voice to take advantage of the opportunity which than arises to state in his own way anything which he may be desirous of stating,

At page 523 his Lordship says:

The fact that the accused were asked to put in written statements, in my opinion, is of no great moment for this purpose. There is all the difference in the world between a written statement, presumably prepared, almost certainly revised, by the lawyers appearing for the defence, and a statement made by the acoused himself so that the Magistrate can observ