DALIP SINGH Vs. MAHLA RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MAHLA Ram filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,466.75 nP. on the basis of a pro -note, dated 9th October, 1955, against Dalip Singh. The suit was tried by the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Bhatinda. Hans Raj, Lakhi Ram and Ramji Dass appeared as witnesses for the Plaintiff in that Court. The first two named were the marginal witnesses and the third scribe of the pronote. They deposed in favour of the Plaintiff. The suit was dismissed on the ground that the pronote was a forged document. The appeal was dismissed by the District Judge, Bhatinda, on 20th January, 1961. Thereafter, Dalip Singh, who was Defendant in the civil suit, filed an application under Section 476, Code of Criminal Procedure, on 18th March, 1961, in the Court of the District Judge with the prayer that a complaint might be lodged under Section 209 or 193 or both read with Section 109, Indian Penal Code, against Mahla Ram, Hans Raj, Lakhi Ram, Karam Chand, and Ramji Dass. The learned District Judge dismissed the application on the short ground that the proceedings against the above Respondents could have been taken under the provisions of Section 479 -A, Code of Criminal Procedure, and that they could not be subsequently proceeded against under Section 476, Code of Criminal Procedure. Dalip Singh has come up in revision against the above order.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties in detail. Section 195, Code of Criminal Procedure, provides for prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below: