KULDIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was argued at great length because of the wide divergence of judicial opinion that centers round Ss. 195 and 476, Criminal P. C. The question is about the validity of a complaint made against the appellant for perjury and for using a forged document as genuine in the following circumstances.

(2.) The second respondent Amar Singh filed a civil suit against the appellant for recovery of a large sum of money on the basis of a mortgage in the Court of Mr. E. F. Barlow, a Subordinate Judge of the First Class. The appellant filed a receipt which purported to show that Rs. 35,000 had been paid towards satisfaction of the mortgage (but whether in full satisfaction or part is not clear), and in the witness box he swore that he had paid the money and was given the receipt.

(3.) The plaintiff then made an application in the Court of Mr. W. Augustine, who is said to have succeeded Mr. Barlow as a Subordinate Judge of the first class, asking that a complaint be filed against the appellant under Ss. 193 and 471, Penal Code.