9911796707
TMI Blog1931 (4) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... majority in 1866, brought a suit against Mahtab Kuer for recovery of the estate on the allegation that he, Umrao Singh, had been adopted by Mahtab Kuer. The case was fought up to appeal in the High Court and was ultimately dismissed. The principal parties to the litigation out of which the present proceedings have arisen, are sons of Umrao Singh. The opposite party in these proceedings Raja Kushal Pal Singh, is a step-brother to four persons, Jogendra Pal Singh, Mahendra Pal Singh, Bhawan Pal Singh and Lakshman Pal Singh. 4. On the death of Mt. Mahtab Kuar, the widow of Chaturbhuj Singh, her daughter Lal Jas Kuar became entitled to the estate and went into possession. The one idea which dominated the mind of Umrao Singh was to get this large property for himself or his family. It is said that the opposite party Raja Kushal Pal Singh was of the same mind and he conceived certain schemes and in pursuance of those schemes, brought into existence certain documents in order that he might establish a claim to the estate. It is said that the document No. 4 is a note book written and prepared by Raja Kushal Pal Singh in which a scheme how to obtain the property was written. Ex. 6 is an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suit was decided and the parties to the suit filed separate appeals. This is why two appeals were before this Court. When the appeals were being heard, an application was made on behalf of Jogendrapal Singh, appellant in one case and respondent in another, for permission to file the documents sought to be produced in court below, together with four others. After some difference of opinion between the learned Judges who heard the appeals, the documents were allowed to be put in. As the documents had not been proved by any formal evidence, to have been in the handwriting of Raja Khushalpal Singh and because it had not been proved that they or some of them had been brought about or procured by him, a question of taking further evidence in the appeal arose. The learned Counsel appearing for Raja Khushalpal Singh in order to avoid a delay in the disposal of the appeals, admitted the documents, for the purposes of the appeals alone. He admitted that the documents, which were said to be in the handwriting of Raja Khushalpal Singh, were in his handwriting. The appeals were decided, but as can be easily seen, no reference was made to the documents now in question and they were not relied o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that unless some requirement has been complied with no Court shall take cognizance of the offences described in those sections. 14. In Sub-section 1, Clause (a), Section 195, certain offences are described and it is stated that no Court shall take cognizance of those offences unless the public servant concerned files a complaint. 15. Clause (b), Sub-section 1 of the same section describes certain offences, but it lays down that only when those offences are committed in certain circumstances, i. e. in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, then the cognizance of those offences shall be barred by Cl (b). An offence under Section 193, for example, may be committed in Court and out of Court. It is only when an offence under Section 193, I.P.C., is alleged to have been committed in or in relation to any proceeding in any Court that a complaint by the Court would be necessary before cognizance is taken of that offence. Similarly, in all other cases enumerated in Clause (b) the bar arises only when the offences are committed in or in relation to any proceeding in any Court. 16. Coming to Clause (c), Sub-section 1, Section 195; a bar is mentioned in particular cases. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Court to file a complaint although it may not be possible for it to file a complaint under Section 476, Criminal P. C. This argument does not appeal to me and for various reasons. A. Court is a creature of law and can act only in the manner laid down in law. Abstract notions of justice cannot persuade a Court to act contrary to rules laid down by law. Further, the responsibility of initiating a prosecution is immense. A person who takes upon himself the responsibility of initiating a prosecution may be himself prosecuted if it is found that the prosecution was lightly and without sufficient cause launched, or if there was a malice in his mind. He may be made civilly liable in damages. In the case of a complaint by the Court all this is not possible and even when the prosecution fails the person prosecuted has no remedy. If therefore a prosecuted person is to have no remedy it is necessary that a Court should act within the rule of law laid down for its guidance and not outside it. 20. As to inherent jurisdiction, it cannot be said that a Court, especially a civil Court, has an inherent jurisdiction to file a complaint. That is not the ordinary function of a civil or any Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut that in the case of Clause (b) the offences described therein by the several sections of the Penal Code are of various kinds and it is only with respect to a limited kind of offences that Clause (b) applies. It was to limit the cases that it became necessary to use the words in or in relation to in Clause (b). In the case of Clause (c) the use of the words committed by a party to a proceeding brought the offences on the same line with the offences as described in Clause (b) or with offences as described in Section 476 of the Code. It was therefore not necessary to introduce the words in or in relation to in Clause (c). 25. Let us consider some of the consequences that would follow if we give a wider interpretation to Clause (c), Section 195. When a civil or revenue or a criminal Court, not being a Court of highest jurisdiction, proceeds under Section 476, an appeal is provided for and the proceeding is subject to re-examination by the appellate Court. If there be any case to which Section 195 (1) (c) is applicable and to which Section 476 does not apply, the result would be that there will be some offences for which a Court would be entitled to file a complaint (assuming ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
