BAKSHISH SINGH Vs. DEVINDERPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed against the order dtd. 26/4/2018 passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Fatehgarh Sahib and order dtd. 1/12/2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby the application under Sec. 340 Cr.P.C. moved by the petitioner has been dismissed and in appeal the order has been affirmed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a civil suit titled as Bakshish Singh Versus PWD and others for recovery which was decided by the Court on 19/1/2017. The respondents appeared in the said case as DW-1 and DW-2. It is the case of the petitioner-plaintiff that respondent No.1 appearing as DW-1 had stated on oath that he was the incumbent Sarpanch at the time of his deposition in Court and had filed an affidavit Ex.DW1/A dtd. 31/8/2016 calling himself a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of Village Bibipur. In fact, he was not a Sarpanch and the said statement was made to injure his interest and mislead the Court. Respondent No.1 had thereafter claimed that in the affidavit, there was typographical error since the same was drafted by his counsel. He thus contended that false evidence had been given by respondent No.1. It was also stated in the application that respondent No.2 had appeared as DW-2 and had denied that he had done construction work over the proposed road and had falsely deposed that no notice under Sec. 80 CPC was issued to defendant Nos.1 to 4. In fact, the notice was duly issued to the defendants. Respondent No.2 also falsely stated that he was not instrumental in seeking demarcation of the land and that no construction was raised during the pendency of litigation. Thus, it was prayed in the application under Sec. 340 Cr.P.C. that the respondents were liable to be punished for having committed the offences under Ss. 417, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 191, 192, 193 and 209 of the IPC and an appropriate inquiry be conducted under Sec. 195 Cr.P.C. in this regard.

(3.) The Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Fatehgarh Sahib came to the conclusion that though the petitioner/applicant had stated that the respondents had deposed falsely in order to cause wrongful loss to him and wrongful gain to themselves, he was unable to prima facie show as to how the evidence of the respondents in the civil case filed by him effected the decision of the case. In fact, even the copy of the judgment dtd. 19/1/2017 had not been placed on record to establish that the decision of the Court was influenced by the purported false evidence given by the respondents.