P V MASAND Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application raises an important point of law as to whether an appeal lies from an order passed by the District Magistrate under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure-Code to the Court of Sessions under Section 476-B of the said Code.

(2.) THE revision application is filed by the four persons against whom the order was passed by the District Magistrate, Thana under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the following circum-stances:

(3.) ON December 20, 1963. Gajadhar made an application to the District Magistrate, Thana, submitting that during the proceedings in the application under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which were, according to the applicant, protracted unduly on account of the influence which his opponents were holding, his opponents relied on an anti-dated false agreement purporting to be of December 25, 1956 and filed false affidavits and gave perjured evidence to the effect that one Dr. Kripal, who was actually in United Kingdom, was in possession of Room No. 15 under that agreement. Gajadhar further alleged that all the persons concerned with that agreement and with the affidavits filed in the said proceedings and the persons who gave evidence against him were liable to be prosecuted for forgery and perjury. He, therefore, prayed that the District Magistrate should sanction prosecution of the persons concerned.