BALASUBRAMANIAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal involves a question as to whether the bar under section 195 (1) (b) (ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply as against a private complaint for an offence under Sections 467 and 471 of the indian Penal Code even in respect of a document which was forged before it was filed in court. Apparently, divergent views have been expressed by this court. In Gopalakrishna Menon v. D. Raja Ready a two-Judge Bench came to a conclusion that even in respect of such a document which was forged before filing it in court, the bar under Section l95 (1) (b) (ii) would apply. Subsequently, however, in the case of Sachida Nand Singh v. State of Bihar the decision in Gopalakrishna Menon case stands expressly overruled and this Court came to a definite conclusion other than the one that was stated in sachida Nand case. For convenience sake, paras 11 and 12 of the judgment in Sachida Nand case are set out hereinbelow:

(2.) During the course of hearing before this Court, however, learned senior Counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu contended that after the decision in Sachida Nand case this Court had occasion to deal with a similar issue in M. S. Ahlawat v. State of Haryana and expressed a different view as has been laid down in Sachida Nand case2.

(3.) Incidentally, it should be noticed here that the decision in Sachida nand case was not placed before the Court for consideration and this Court in that case came to a conclusion as recorded in paras 5 and 6 which for convenience sake are also set out hereinbelow: