SATYA NARAYAN OMAR Vs. N K PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application Under Section 482 of the Criminal P. C. against the order dated 28-8-1979, passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in Criminal Revision No, 49 of 1979, by which an order dated 22-2-1971, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior, in Criminal Case No. 401 of 1978 has been confirmed, in which the complaint of the petitioner was dismissed for want of necessary sanction Under Section 197, Cr. P. C.

(2.) THE complaint of the petitioner against the non-petitioner was that the non-petitioner has committed an offence of giving false evidence, fabricating false evidence, cheating, mischief and defamation which is punishable under Secs. 193, 418, 427 and 500 of the Penal Code. The offence was committed by the non-petitioner at the time when he was posted at Gwalior on the post of the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax and the petitioner was posted under him when he was suspended from the service. The petitioner was occupying the post of the Sales Tax Inspector.

(3.) ON 11-9-1975, the non-petitioner fabricated a false report which contains a false statement by the non-petitioner that the petitioner has left his headquarters without the permission of the non-petitioner. On 15-9-1975, the nonr petitioner used this fabricated false report against the petitioner by sending it to the Commissioner of Sales Tax on the basis of which, he instituted a departmental enquiry against the petitioner and appointed an Enquiry Officer under the M, P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 to investigate the charges made against the petitioner that he has left his headquarters without permission. In the aforesaid departmental enquiry, the alleged fabricated false report was produced in evidence. The departmental enquiry officer also summoned the non-petitioner to give his own evidence on 1-5-1976. In obedience to that summons, the non-petitioner gave, it is alleged, a fabricated false statement and, therefore, the Enquiry Officer, believing the statement given on oath by the non-petitioner to the effect that on 11-9-1975, the petitioner has not attended his office since 8-9-1975; that on the basis of the aforesaid statement, the Enquiry Officer formed an opinion against the petitioner that he had left his headquarters on 8-9-1975 without permission. The result was that the petitioner was removed from Government service. Therefore, the petitioner filed a complaint alleging that the statement given by the non-petitioner was false to his knowledge and he has fabricated that evidence. Further, he has alleged that on 8-9-1975, the petitioner submitted an application dated 8-9-1975 to the non-petitioner, asking him his permission to leave the headquarters. The non-petitioner put his signature and date of receipt of the application and that application is in the office record of the non-petitioner. Further, he has submitted that on 9-9-1975, the office was closed due. to general holiday on account of Ganesh Chaturthi. Again on 11-9-1975, the petitioner submitted an application and on that application also, there is a date and signature mentioning the receipt of the application. Therefore, if these facts are taken into account, the statement given by the non-petitioner that from 8-9-1975 to 11-9-1975, the petitioner was absent without permission is false and as such, he filed a complaint before the competent Court to take action.