H S AHIUWALIA Vs. D C JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner made a complaint to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh against the respondents alleging that they had committed offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and this complaint was being enquired into by the police of police station West, Sector 11, Chandigarh. THE respondents apprehending their arrest in connection with this case moved an application for anticipatory bail. Along with the application an affidavit sworn by respondent No. 1 was attached. On 2.6.1992 the application for anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr. P.C. was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. THEreafter the petitioner moved an application under section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for initiating an enquiry and for filing of a complaint against the respondents for having sworn a false affidavit. THE following order was passed by the Sessions Judge, Chandigarh on this application: As there is no good ground for proceeding as provided under section 340 Cr. P.c. this application made in that behalf is misconceived. Be filed.T Aggrieved by this order the petitioner has filed the present Revision Petition.

(2.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and rind that this Revision Petition is liable to dismissal on the short ground that it is not maintainable in view of the remedy of appeal, which was available to be petitioner. Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure postulates that any person on whose application any court other than a High Court has refused to make a complaint under Subsection (i) of (2) of Section 340, or against whom such a complaint has been made by such court, may appeal to the Court to which such former court is subordinate within the meaning of subsection (4) of section 195, and the superior Court may thereupon, after notice to the parties concerned, direct the withdrawal of the complaint, or, as the case may be, making of the com plaint which such former court might have made under section 340, and if it makes such complaint, the provisions of that section shall apply accordingly . Since the petitioner could avail the remedy of appeal, revision of petition was not competent. Moreover, no affidavit was sworn by Mrs. Usha Jam respondent No. 2 and the application under section 340 Criminal Procedure Code against her was without any basis. On the day when the application was fixed for hearing, the present petitioner was absent. The impugned order was passed by the learned Sessions Judge after going through the record and there does not appear to be any merit in this revision petition. The same is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.