M P SIRAJUDEEN Vs. M GANESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of acquittal of the respondent accused passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sankari in C.C. No. 449 of 1978.

(2.) The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows: The appellant herein preferred a private complaint against the respondent-accused under 5. 211 of the I.P.C. The case of the appellant is that he is employed as an Administrative Officer of P.S.K. Finance and Chit Funds Limited, Salem, and that he is attending to the business of Nirmala Bankers which is the sister concern of the said P.S.K. Finance and Chit Funds Ltd. In pursuance of an order of attachment passed by the Sub Court, Salem, in 0.S. No. 139 of 1978 against one Lakshmana Gounder for the debt due to the Nirmala Bankers, two pumpset motors belonging to the said Lakshmana Gounder were attached by the court Amin on 12th February, 1978 in the presence of the Village Munsif. The respondent-accused preferred a complaint before the Namigiripet Police Station against the appellant herein and others under Ss. 147, 448 and 379, Indian Penal Code and the same was registered in Cr. No. 59 of 1978 and that it was later referred by police. The averments in the said complaint are totally false and the respondent had made the said allegations with a view to harass the appellant and to damage his reputation and as such his action amounts to an offence under 5. 211 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) In support of the above allegations, four witnesses were examined and Exs. P1. to P4 were filed. P.W. 1 is no other than the complainant himself and P W. 2 is the Amin of the court who effected the order of attachment. P.W. 3 is the Managing Partner of the said P.S.K. Finance and Chit Funds Limited as well as the employer of the complainant. P.W. 4 is a resident of Moolapallipatti. They were examined to prove that the attachment of one 5 H.P. motor and one 25 H.P. motor belonging to Lakshmana Gounder was effected in pursuance of the order under Ex. P 1 in the presence of P.W. 1, Lakshmana Gounder and others and that they were entrusted with P.W. 3 on his executing security bond Ex. P2. List of properties attached is marked as Ex. P3. Ex. P4 is the original complaint preferred by the respondent-accused to the police in Cr. No. 59 of 1978.