BADRI S/O KALLU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant's application for the quashing under Sections 215 and 561, Criminal Procedure Code of an order committing him to the Court of Session to stand trial for the offence of Section 211, I.P.C. has been referred by our brother, Katju, to a larger Bench. The commitment is sought to be quashed on the sole ground that a Magistrate took cognisance of the offence against the applicant on a complaint by a private person and not by a Court. On 26.6.1960 the applicant made a report at a police station against the complainant Gyari and his relations accusing them of committing on June 25 or 26, 1960 the offence of Section 307, I. P. C. From 14th June, 1960 to 27th June, 1960, the complainant and his relations had all been in the District Jail, Lucknow, in connection with an offence committed under the Railways Act and were released on 27.6.1960. Thus the report made against them was false. The police investigated into the report and arrested the complainant and his relations. Since the police could not complete the investigation within 24 hours, they were produced before a magistrate, who remanded them to custody on 2.7.1960. Their application for bail was refused by him. They made another application for bail pointing out that on the date on which they were alleged to have committed the offence they were undergoing imprisonment in a jail at Lucknow. On this an enquiry was made by the Magistrate from the police and the police submitted a report under Section 173, Criminal Procedure Code to the effect that on investigation the report made by the applicant had been found to be false, that no offence had been committed by the complainant etc. and that they be released from custody. This report was placed before the Magistrate on 27.7.1960 and he discharged the complainant and others on 28.7.1960.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the allegations made in the complaint against the applicant made out an offence under Section 211, I.P.C. According to the complaint the report made by the applicant against the complainant and others contained a false charge. Section 195 (1) (b), Criminal Procedure Code is to the effect that no Court shall take cognisance of any offence punishable under Section 211, I.P.C. "when such an offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, except on the complaint in writing of such Court." It was contended on behalf of the applicant that the offence alleged to have been committed by him was alleged to have been committed in relation to certain proceedings in the Court of a Magistrate. It was not his contention that it was alleged to have been committed in any proceedings in any Court. The question before us is whether the offence was alleged to have been committed in relation to any proceeding in any Court.

(3.) THE Magistrate had to deal with matters arising out of the report lodged by the applicant on three occasions,