9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 1824 - SC - Indian LawsOffence of cheating against the appellant which led to the pregnancy of Nagal - Offence under section 193 of the IPC - Proceedings against the respondent on the basis of the complaint - Punishment for false evidence - Held that - In the light of the language of section 195 Cr.P.C. we do not find fault with the conclusion of the learned Magistrate in dismissing the complaint of the appellant herein for the reason that the complaint is not filed by the person contemplated under section 195 Cr.P.C. It may be mentioned here that as a matter of fact the Court before which the instant complaint was lodged is not the same Court before which the appellant herein was prosecuted by the respondent. Under section 340(1) of the Cr.P.C., it is stipulated that whenever it appears that any one of the offences mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 195 appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding before a Court, that Court either on an application made to it or otherwise make a complaint thereof in writing to the competent Magistrate after following the procedure mentioned under section 340 of the Cr.P.C.2 Admittedly, the appellant herein did not make an application to the judicial magistrate No.1, Pollachi under section 340 to make a complaint against the respondent herein nor the said magistrate suo moto made a complaint. Therefore, the learned judicial magistrate No.2 before whom the private complaint is made by the appellant had no option but to dismiss the complaint. But the High Court, in our view, is not justified in confining itself to the examination of the correctness of the order of the magistrate dismissing the said private complaint. Both Section 195(1) and Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. authorise the exercise of the power conferred under Section 195(1) by any other court to which the court in respect of which the offence is committed is subordinate to. The High Courts not only have the authority to exercise such jurisdiction but also an obligation to exercise such power in appropriate cases. Such obligation, in our opinion, flows from two factors (1) the embargo created by Section 195 restricting the liberty of aggrieved persons to initiate criminal proceedings with respect to offences prescribed under Section 195; (2) such offences pertain to either the contempt of lawful authorities of public servants or offences against public justice. In the case on hand, when the appellant alleges that he had been prosecuted on the basis of a palpably false statement coupled with the further allegation in his complaint that the respondent did so for extraneous considerations, we are of the opinion that it is an appropriate case where the High Court ought to have exercised the jurisdiction under Section 195 Cr.P.C.. The allegation such as the one made by the complainant against the respondent is not uncommon. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The matter is remitted to the High Court for further appropriate course of action to initiate proceedings against the respondent on the basis of the complaint of the appellant in accordance with law.
Issues Involved:
1. Dismissal of a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. 2. Application of Sections 195 and 340 of the Cr.P.C. 3. Examination of the offence under Section 193 IPC. 4. Examination of the offence under Section 211 IPC. 5. Jurisdiction and authority of the High Court under Section 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Dismissal of a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C.: The appellant filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. against the respondent, which was dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate No.2 at Pollachi. The appellant then challenged this dismissal in the High Court of Madras through Crl. R.C. No.1119 of 2011, which was also dismissed, leading to the present appeal. 2. Application of Sections 195 and 340 of the Cr.P.C.: The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint on the ground that under Sections 195 and 340 of the Cr.P.C., the complaint was not maintainable. Section 195 bars criminal courts from taking cognizance of an offence under Section 193 IPC except on the complaint in writing of that Court or an officer of that Court in relation to any proceeding in the Court where the offence under Section 193 is said to have been committed. 3. Examination of the offence under Section 193 IPC: The appellant was prosecuted for offences under Sections 417 and 506(i) IPC, based on a charge-sheet filed by the respondent, which falsely alleged that the complainant became pregnant due to the appellant. Despite a medical opinion confirming that the complainant was not pregnant, the respondent included this false statement in the charge-sheet. The Supreme Court noted that the act of giving false evidence under Section 193 IPC involves making a false statement under oath or being legally bound to state the truth. The Court observed that a police officer filing a charge-sheet does not make any statement under oath, thus the offence under Section 193 IPC might not be applicable. 4. Examination of the offence under Section 211 IPC: The Court considered that the facts might constitute an offence under Section 211 IPC, which deals with instituting or causing to be instituted any criminal proceeding or falsely charging any person of having committed an offence without just or lawful ground. The Court emphasized that this aspect had not been examined at any stage in the case. 5. Jurisdiction and authority of the High Court under Section 195 and 340 Cr.P.C.: The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for not exercising its jurisdiction under Section 195 Cr.P.C. and merely confining itself to the correctness of the order of the Magistrate. The Court highlighted that both Sections 195(1) and 340(2) Cr.P.C. authorize the High Court to exercise jurisdiction over offences committed in relation to proceedings before subordinate courts. The High Court, being a constitutional court with superintendence over all courts within its jurisdiction, can exercise this power either on an application made to it or suo moto in the interest of justice. The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court should have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 195 Cr.P.C. given the allegations of false prosecution based on extraneous considerations. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the High Court for further appropriate action to initiate proceedings against the respondent based on the appellant's complaint. Conclusion: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, remitting the matter to the High Court for further action, emphasizing the High Court's obligation to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 195 Cr.P.C. in appropriate cases to maintain the integrity of the judicial process and the legal system.
|
