PADMA SABAT Vs. SUSILA GOUDA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is preferred against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Berhampur, Ganjam, in Criminal Revision No. 134 of 1984 setting aside the order dated 31-7-1984, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Surada, in I.C.C. No. 7 of 1983 taking cognizance against the accused persons of the offences under Sections 419, 467 and 109, I.P.C.

(2.) The present Petitioner was the' complainant in I.C.C. No. 7 of 1983 and filed the complaint petition against five accused persons (the present opposite parties) alleging that they have forged a sale deed and produced the said sale deed in the mutation proceedings for getting the land mutated in favour of opposite party No. 1. On the basis of the complaint petition and the initial statement of the complainant, cognizance was taken against the accused persons under Sections 419, 467 and 109, I.P.C.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the provisions of Section 195(1)(b), Code of Criminal Procedure would not stand in the way of the maintainability of the complaint petition filed by the Petitioner and therefore, the learned Sessions Judge acted illegally in quashing the order of the Magistrate taking cognizance against the accused persons under Sections 419, 467 and 109, I.P.C. The scope of the present revision is confined to a consideration of the provisions of Section 195(1)(b), Code of Criminal Procedure. For convenience of ready reference the relevant provisions of Section 195, Code of Criminal Procedure are quoted below: