MAMTA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Section 482 CrPC assails the order of court below dated 24.8.2009, whereby the court below has taken cognizance of a complaint/report received from Third Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind under Section 195 read with Section 201 CrPC and issued warrant against the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner's father was murdered on 13.11.1993. A Sessions Trial No.119/1996 was instituted. The petitioner was the star witness of the prosecution. The court below decided the said trial on 29.10.2002 and opined that the petitioner was the only eye witness. However, she has deliberately made a statement to falsely implicate certain accused. Her statements recorded under Sections 161, 164 CrPC are extremely contradictory in nature. Her one statement was also recorded by the Investigation Officer Shri Katroliya. In view of variation of her statements, the court below opined that it will be proper to initiate proceedings under Section 195 CrPC against the petitioner. In para 47 of the judgment, the court below directed for filing complaint before the competent court.

(3.) Shri Sanjay Gupta assailed it mainly on two grounds. Firstly, it is urged that for initiating action under Section 195 CrPC, it is mandatory to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 340 CrPC. By placing reliance on Section 340, it is urged that without conducting an enquiry no proceedings can be permitted to continue. Secondly, it is urged that after considerable long time, no useful purpose would be served in permitting the court below to proceed with the matter, more so when the original record of the sessions trial has been destroyed by the court below.