SYED GOLAM RASUL Vs. S K ARSHED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule arises out of a proceeding under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The original case was started for inter alia criminal house-trespass (53ection 448 of the Indian Penal Code) and rioting (Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code) against the present opposite parties. That case ended in an acquittal. The present Petitioner was the informant (complainant), on whose information the said original case was started. The learned Magistrate, while acquitting the accused who are the opposite parties before me, recorded a finding that the case was "entirely false, malicious and vexatious" and, accordingly, he issued a "notice" upon the present Petitioner to show cause why action should not be taken against him under Section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After the cause had been shown the learned Magistrate re-affirmed his earlier finding that the original prosecution case was "entirely false, malicious "and vexatious" in the following words, namely, "I am still of '"opinion that the case is maliciously false, frivolous and "vexatious", and he directed the present Petitioner to pay compensation of Rs. 50 to each of the accused opposite parties. This order was upheld by the learned Sessions Judge on appeal subject to this modification that the compensation, payable to the opposite parties, was reduced to Rs. 25 each. Thereafter, the present Rule was obtained by the Petitioner.

(3.) Before dealing with the case on the merits, I shall dispose of two technical points, urged in support of this Rule.