HARI DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The High Court at Calcutta made an order directing the Registrar of the Court to file a complaint in the Court of a magistrate against the appellants under Ss. 211, 199 and other appropriate sections of the Indian Penal Code. The Registrar thereupon filed a complaint against the appellants under Ss. 193, 199 and 211 of the Code. The appellants have appealed against the order of the High Court under a certificate granted under Art. 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution.

(2.) It appears that the appellants had moved the High Court for committal for contempt of court of certain respondents, whom I will call the Mondal respondents, for breach of an injunction issued in a suit. That injunction prohibited the respondents from disturbing the appellants' possession of some property. It was said by the appellants that the Mondal respondents attempted to enter forcibly into the properties in breach of the injunction and "in the course of such attempt broke open the gate, cut down one tree and also broke down the gate" The High Court referred the matter to the Subordinate Judge for a report on the allegations about breach of injunction and on a consideration of that report came to the conclusion that the appellants "could not reasonably be believed" and expressed its agreement with the Subordinate Judge's view that "the allegations made by the petitioners are not true". The petitioners referred to are the appellants. The petition for committal for contempt of court was thereupon dismissed. There after the Mondal respondent moved the High Court and obtained the order directing a complaint to be lodged as earlier mentioned. Their case was that deliberate false statements had been made in affidavits used by the appellants in connection with their application for the committal of the Mondal respondents for contempt of court.

(3.) Mr. Sarjoo Prasad appearing for the appellants has first said that the order in so far as it directed a complaint under Ss. 193 and 199 of the Code could not be supported as there was no definite finding in the order dismissing the application for contempt of court that any false statement had been made. I have earlier set out the relevant parts of that order and I think that it contains such a finding. The High Court held that "the allegations .........are not true". It is unnecessary to pursue this question further for Mr. Sarjoo Prasad's contention is obviously unsustainable.