KAIKAR MAHALINGA BHAT Vs. UPPINANGADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the main grievance of the petitioner is that the complaint came to be presented by the Secretary of the Uppinangady Grama Panchayat. Therefore, the learned J.M.F.C. ought to have recorded the sworn statement of the Secretary and thereby the proceedings have been vitiated.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that as per the provisions of Section 200 Cr.P.C. it is mandatory that before registering the case, the sworn statement of the complainant has to be recorded. Though the Secretary is a public servant, since he has not filed the complaint in his personal capacity that the Court ought to have recorded the sworn statement as the complainant is Uppinangady Grama Panchayat. Therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings.

(3.) IT is clear whenever an autonomous body has been represented by a public servant that the sworn statement of such a person need not be recorded. The provisions of Section 200(a) Cr.P.C. make it clear that in case if the complaint is presented by a public servant, the sworn statement may be dispensed with. In view of the clear provision, the contention of the learned counsel that the sworn statement of the Secretary ought to have been recorded before proceeding with the matter is not sustainable in the light of the decision reported in AIR 1930 Calcutta 222 which also clearly applies to the facts of this case. Therefore, I do not find any merits in this petition. No other points are urged. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.