CHHOTE LAL SAHU Vs. UCHIT MAHTON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT appears that the petitioner was a defendant in a small cause suit brought by the opposite party for the realisation of certain amount of money on a handnote. The petitioner filed a written statement in the suit, pleading that the amount advanced to him was actually less than the amount shown in the handnote and that the amount advanced had been repaid to the opposite party with interest. In support of this plea the petitioner examined himself as D. W. 1 and gave evidence. He also produced and relied upon a purja (Ext. A) said to have been granted by the father of the opposite party. The Small Cause Court Judge did not believe the petitioner's case and granted a decree to the opposite party for the entire claim, holding that the purja had been manufactured for the purpose of the case. An application was made under Section 476, Code of Criminal Procedure, by the opposite party for prosecuting the petitioner. The application was rejected by the Small Cause Court Judge but, on an appeal preferred under Section 476B, the District Judge of Monghyr held that the petitioner should he prosecuted. He accordingly allowed the appeal and directed the learned Small Cause Court Judge to file a complaint against the petitioner "for using in court a forged purja having reason to believe that the same was forged."

(2.) IN support of this application learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of Section 479A, Code of Criminal Procedure, acted as a bar in the present Case to the taking of proceedings for prosecuting the petitioner under Section 476, Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 479A reads as follows:-