Prem Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Dewan, J.

Prem Singh petitioner has filed this petition praying that the proceedings under S. 182 Indian Penal Code, which have been drawn up in pursuance of the order (Copy annexure A) passed under S. 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Code) and the chargesheet (Copy annexure B)framed by the Judicial Magistrate, Kharar, should be quashed.

The impugned charge (copy annexure B) framed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharar, is in the following terms :

"That you Prem Singh on 5.5.77 in the area of Mubarikpur gave false information to SubInspector, Vasan Singh, a Public Servant knowing and believing the same to be false, made the said Public Servant to get a case F.I.R. No. 37 dated 5.7.1977 registered on the basis of the said information and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 182 I.p.C. and you Jaswinder Singh and Charan Singh abetted the commission of the said offence by Prem Singh by being his false witnesses in the occurrence narrated by Prem Singh to SubInspector Vasan Singh and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 182 IPC read with S. 109 IPC and within my cognizance."

Without going into the details of the grounds taken up by in the petition, in substance the allegations therein amount to this :

Mehma Singh filed an application under S. 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, on the ground that Prem Singh petitioner and his son Avtar Singh caused grievous injuries to the applicant and his arm had been disabled permanently. A challan was put in by the police under S. 326, Indian Penal Code, against the petitioner and others. It was alleged that in order to save themselves, the petitioner got him falsely implicated for causing injuries to him sand his son. The case of Mehma Singh was that Prem Singh manoeuvred injuries in connivance with other respondents. On these grounds, Mehma Singh prayed that after making preliminary enquiry, action be taken against the petitioner and others under Ss. 340/344 of the Code, for creating false evidence.

The Judicial Magistrate after going into the evidence found a prima facie case against the petitioner and others under Ss. 182 and 182/109, Indian Penal Code and accordingly ordered that a complaint be filed against them before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, RupNagar. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, a complaint was filed an Prem Singh and others were charged for the offence under Ss. 182 and 182/109, Indian Penal Code, by Shri T.R. Bansal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharar. By means of the present petition, the aforesaid order and the chargesheet are sought to be quashed by invoking the provisions of S. 482 of the Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the provisions of S. 340 of the Code were not applicable at all to the facts of the present case and that the offence under S. 182, Indian Penal Code, was not one of the offences mentioned under S. 195(1)(b) of the Code and as such the order in question for filing the complaint against the petitioner was without jurisdiction. The relevant petition S. 340(1) of the Code for the present purpose reads thus :

"340. Procedure in cases mentioned in Sec. 195 :

(1) When upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in Cl.(b) of subsection (1) of sec. 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary :

(a) record a filing to that effect;

(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;

(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction;

X X X X X ."

The argument was that since the court was empowered to complain only in respect of offences mentioned in clause (b) of Section 195(1) of the Code, an order for a complaint by the Judicial Magistrate for an offence under S. 182, Indian Penal Code, was erroneous. There can be no doubt that the offence under S. 182, Indian Penal Code, is not at all mentioned in clause (b) of Section 195(1) of the Code. Learned counsel in support of his contention referred to Sarbeswar Nath v. Emperor, AIR 1924 Calcutta 501. The order in that case was for the prosecution of the certain persons under Ss. 186.353,341 and 147, Indian Penal Code, Their Lordships pointed out that offences under Ss.353, 341 and 147,Indian Penal Code were not mentioned in S.195 of the Code and, therefore, S. 476 and no application to them and those were offences in regard to which the officers of the court and the servant of the decreeholder might institute proceeding direct without the intervention of the Civil Court.

The learned counsel also referred to M. Durgaprashadarao v. C. Sunder Bhutt, A.I.R. 1952 Madras 607. It was held in that case that no complaint for an offence under S. 183, Indian Penal Code, could be filed by a Court as S. 476 applied only to cases falling within S. 195(1) clauses (b) and (c) of the Code. He relied on Virindar Kumar Satyawadi v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 153 as well. The observation relevant for the present purpose in that case was that S. 476 applied only to offences mentioned in S. 195(1)(b) and (c) and not to those mentioned in respect of offences not referred to in S. 195(1)(b). In other words, if the offence in question does not fall within the purview of S. 195(1)(b) of the Code, a court has no jurisdiction to make a complaint. The Court is empowered to complain only in respect of offences mentioned in clause (b) of S. 195(1) of the Code.

I have already indicated that the offence under S. 182, Indian Penal Code, was not at all mentioned in clause (b) of S. 195(1) of the Code. Accordingly, I am of the view that the order of the learned Magistrate for the filing of a complaint in respect of the offence under S. 182 and 182/109 Indian Penal Code, is without jurisdiction. For these reasons, the petition is allowed and the proceedings pending against the petitioner and other under Ss. 182 and 182/109, Indian Penal Code, are hereby quashed.