NAKLI SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the revisionist and Mr. Nandan Arya, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the applicant against certain persons being Complaint Case No. 105 of 1991 under Section 420/406 I.P.C. In the said complaint after due process, the case proceeded against the accused persons, who were ultimately acquitted by the trial Court. However, the trial Court while acquitting the accused also observed that the present applicant in his deposition to the Court as a witness had given false evidence and therefore, the Court suo moto took cognizance of the offence under Section 193 of I.P.C. and initiated proceeding against him in the same order dated 29.3.2006. In short, the matter now proceeded against the applicant under Section 344 (1) of Cr.P.C. This order, whereby the cognizance has been taken against the applicant for the alleged offence committed by him has been challenged by the applicant on various grounds. The applicant alleges that before passing the order under Section 340, a preliminary inquiry was mandatory.

(3.) Section 340 of Cr.P.C. reads as under:-