SANGHVI SUKHRAJ Vs. MADHANRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions have been filed by the petitioner. The two petitions are connected and they raise allied questions of law for consideration. Hence, they are being disposed of by a common order. In Crl M.P.No.5251 of 1980, the petitioner prays for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No. 9424 of 1980 on the file of the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras filed by the 1st respondent therein. In Crl M.P.No.5117 of 81 the petitioner seeks quashing of the proceeding in Crl M.P.No.586 of 1981 on the file of the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras.

(2.) The facts which require mention are as under. The petitioner gave a complaint against two persons viz., Madanlal Sonigaraha and Sohanraj Sonigara, to the Deputy Commissioner of Police Crime, Madras, on 20-7-1978, alleging that in respect of a partnership business carried on by him and his brother with the above-mentioned persons, the latter had committed mis-appropriation of partnership money. The police authorities registered a case and investigated the report and, in the course of investigation, arrested the two persons. Subsequently, they were released on bail by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Madras. On fuller investigation of the case, the police authorities came to the conclusion that the dispute was of a civil nature and therefore, they referred the complaint of the petitioner as mistake of fact and sent a report to that effect to the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate. Thereafter, the first respondent in Crl M.P.No.5231 of 1980 filed a private complaint against the petitioner herein under Section 190, Criminal Procedure Code, for offences punishable under Sections 211 and 500, Indian Penal Code on the ground that the report given by the petitioner to the police authorities contained false charges made with a view to defame him and his brother. The Magistrate took the complaint on file in C.C.No.9424 of 1980 under Sections 211 and 500, Indian Penal Code and issued process to the petitioner. It is at that stage of matters, the petitioner has come forward to this Court with this petition. His contention is that in respect of an offence under Section 211, Indian Penal Code, Section 195, Criminal Procedure Code, enjoins that no Court shall take cognizance of a case unless the complaint is made in writing by the Court before which the offence was committed,, or some other Court to which that Court is subordinate.

(3.) In the other petition, Crl.M.P. No. 5117 of 1981, the first respondent Sohanraj (brother of the complainant in the first petition) filed a petition in M.P.586 of 1981 moving the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, to hold an enquiry against the petitioner under S. 340, Crl.P.C., and then file a complaint against the petitioner if. the Court was satisfied that he had committed an offence punishable under Section 211, Indian Penal Code. In order to have those proceedings quashed, the petitioner has filed Crl. M.P.No. 5117 of 1981.