KUNHAMBOO NAMBIAR Vs. CHINDAN NAMBIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition to revise an order passed by the District Judge of Tellicherry in an appeal against an order made by the District Munsiff of Taliparamba on an application under S.195 and 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For Rs. 2115 alleged to be due to him under a pronote, Ext. A-6 the revision petitioner brought a suit O.S. 55/1950 of the Munsiffs Court of Taliparamba against the respondents. They denied the genuineness of the pronote but the suit was decreed in the first instance. On appeal by the respondents the Trial Courts decree was set aside and the suit remanded for trial de novo. After the remand the respondents got the pro-note examined by certain technical experts and obtained a report that it was not genuine and thereafter the petitioner defaulted to appear and prosecute the suit and so it was dismissed for default. Then the respondents applied under S.195 and 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the District Munsiff for prosecuting the petitioner for offences under S.191, 192, 193 and 471, Indian Penal Code. The District Munsiff dismissed this application but on appeal by the respondents the District Judge of Tellicherry reversed the District Munsiffs order and finding that there was a reasonable probability of the proposed prosecution ending in conviction directed the District Munsiff to record a finding in accordance with his (District Judges) judgment and make a complaint before a competent Magistrate against the petitioner for offences under S.193 and 471, Indian Penal Code. The revision petition is against this order of the District Judge.

(2.) Two grounds were urged before me against the District Judges order. One was that there was no finding by the District Judge that there was a prima facie case and the other was that there was no evidence on which a finding in this respect could be entered. The first ground appears to me to be unsustainable, but the revision petitioner has to succeed on the second ground.

(3.) I am inclined to think that when the District Judge says in Para.3 of his order There is a reasonable and good foundation for the prosecution and there is a reasonable probability of the prosecution ending in conviction, he really means that a prima facie case has been made out by the respondents.