Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gangadhar Vithobaji Kayande Patil, filed a criminal complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, seeking direction to register an offence. The Magistrate issued a direction under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), leading to the registration of Crime No.4 of 2007 at Kadim Jalna Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 120, 405, 406, 468, 469, 201, 474 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The petitioner was the complainant in the case. During the trial, the state failed to provide a government pleader to conduct the prosecution, compelling the petitioner to engage a private advocate at his own expense. The petitioner incurred costs for the private advocate's fees. The petitioner then filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking reimbursement of the expenses incurred for engaging the private advocate. The High Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the petition. The court held that since the state failed to provide a government pleader, the petitioner was forced to engage a private advocate, and therefore, the state must reimburse the expenses incurred by the petitioner. The court directed the state to pay the amount spent by the petitioner for the private advocate. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justice A.H. Joshi and Justice Sunil P. Deshmukh on November 22, 2012.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Reimbursement of Expenses - Section 357(1) and (3) CrPC - Complainant's Right - The petitioner filed a complaint and the court directed investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. The state failed to provide a government pleader, forcing the petitioner to engage a private advocate. The High Court held that the state must reimburse the expenses incurred by the petitioner for engaging a private advocate, as the state's failure to provide a government pleader caused the petitioner to incur costs. The court directed the state to pay the amount spent by the petitioner for the private advocate. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who filed a criminal complaint and was compelled to engage a private advocate due to the state's failure to provide a government pleader, is entitled to reimbursement of the expenses incurred for such engagement.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The state is directed to pay the amount spent by the petitioner for engaging a private advocate.
Law Points
- Reimbursement of expenses incurred by complainant for engaging private advocate when state fails to provide government pleader
- Section 357(1) CrPC
- Section 357(3) CrPC
- inherent powers of High Court under Section 482 CrPC
