NIMMAKAYALA AUDI NARRAYANAMMA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complaint filed on February 2, 1965 by the appellant before the Police against Gotur Palreddi and eight others for the offences under Sections 457, 380, 395 and 395 read with 397 I. P. C. was referred as false. Thereupon, a private complaint preferred by her on 1 -7 -65 before the J.S.C.M., Cuddapah was, after committal tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Cuddapah in S. C. 5/65 who, by his judgment dated October 28, 1967 acquitted the accused of all the charges levelled against them holding that there was neither truth nor substance in the complaint. On 19 -1 -1968, the Assistant Sessions Judge filed a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Cuddapah against the appellant alleging that she had maliciously instituted criminal proceedings against Gotur Palreddi and eight others on the false charge of commission of the offence of dacoity with intent to cause injury to them, knowing that there was no just or lawful ground for such charge or proceeding in his Court, and has thereby committed an offence punishable under the 2nd part of Section 211 I. P. C. Hence this appeal.

(2.) THE failure on the part of the Assistant Sessions Judge, contended by Sri Padmanabha Reddy for the Appellant, to give a finding as contemplated by Section 476 Criminal P. C. about the expediency in the interests of justice to inquire into the offence under Section 211 I. P. C. alleged to have been committed by his client in the course of trial in S. C. No. 5 of 1965, warrants the quashing of the complaint.

(3.) THE learned Public Prosecutor contended contra and urged that Section 470 Criminal P. C. does not contemplate the Court to give any such specific finding in every case.