MUTHUSWAMY CHETTIAR Vs. A V PERUMAL CHETTIAR,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision proceeding involves a short ground of the propriety of a direction made by court under Section 250, Criminal Procedure Code for payment of compensation of Rs. 250 to the accused in the case by the complainant, who is the President of a Village Panchayat Board. The facts are that the complainant (revision petitioner) first made a complaint to the police with regard to the alleged cutting and theft of certain trees by the respondent, which were, according to him, situate on poromboke land and were in the possession of the Panchayat Board. The police investigated the case, and referred it as a mistake of fact. The complainant then pressed the case as a private complaint. After a certain number of witnesses were heard, the learned Magistrate discharged the accused under Section 253(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that no prima facie case had been made out. The learned Magistrate then proceeded to ask the President of the Panchayat Board (P.W. 1) to show cause why he should not be directed to pay compensation for preferring a false and vexatious complaint. After hearing the submission of the President (revision petitioner), the learned Magistrate made an order directing the complainant to pay Rs. 250 as compensation to the accused.

(2.) IT appears to me to be vary clear that this order has been made, infringing the principles applicable to a situation of that kind. The principles have been set forth by Ramaswami, J. in Natesa Udayar v. Kanagasabai Udayar, 1953 Mad WN Cri. 93 : (AIR 1954 Madras 279), where the learned Judge has collected and referred to all the precedents exhaustively. As observed by the learned Judge :

(3.) IN the present case, there is, no doubt, evidence of certain previous proceedings between the complainant and the accused (respondent), resulting in ill -will between the parties. But, dearly, that would be an unsafe and dangerous criterion to adopt, in the context of a contemplated exercise of the power of the court under Section 250, Criminal Procedure Code A man may have cause for ill -will against another, and that very ill -will may motivate him to prefer a criminal complaint; notwithstanding' this, he may be genuinely acting under the impression that the complaint was well -founded. It would simply be the difference between a situation where an aggrieved person feels an impetus to pursue his remedy, to the disadvantage or injury of a respondent, and a situation where an aggrieved person is willing to drop the matter, and not to proceed further.