In this petition the scope of the doctrine of testimonial compulsion incorporated in Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India has come up for consideration, and it arises under the following circumstances.

2. In connection with the alleged defalcations of the funds of the Hyderabad Khadi Samithi, two private complaints were filed by one Ramachandravaswani claiming to be Chief Accountant and also the President of the Employees Union of the said Samithi, before the VI City Magistrate, Hyderabad and they were taken on file as C.C. Nos. 1371 of 1970 and 1372 of 1970 for offences under section 408, Indian Penal Code.

3. In C.C. No. 1371 of 1970 the accused were shown as Sri Swami Ramananda Thirtha, Damodar Pangrekar (present petitioner) and Ramakishna Nanavati. As Sri Ramananda Thirtha died, the case was proceeded with against the remaining two. In G.C. No. 1372 of 1970 though the complaint was against six persons including the present petitioner (D.V. Pangrekar), cognizance of the complaint was taken only as against Ramakrishna Nanavati. Both the cases were being posted for trial together on the same days and summons were sought to be taken in both the cases against D.V. Pangre