KISHUN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application to quash the complaint filed by the District and Sessions Judge of Hazaribagh (Annexure -2 under provisions of Section 479 -A). It appears that one Nunulal Prasad, driver, was tried for an offence under Sections 304 and 279 of the Indian Penal Code for driving a car in a rash and negligent manner, and thereby killing a woman. The accused was convicted by the Munsif -Magistrate, First Class of Giridih, on the 26th July, 1966 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 304, but no separate sentence was passed under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused (driver) filed Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1966 in the Court of the Sessions Judge of Hazaribagh, who allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction passed by the Munsif -Magistrate by his judgement and order dated the 18th December, 1967. In the judgement, he mentioned that the evidence given by the petitioner who was P.W. 7 in the case did not state the truth rather a false evidence in order to shield the accused. Therefore, in the judgement itself he directed that a complaint should be filed against the petitioner for being tried under Sections 193 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the main grievance of the petitioner is that the learned Sessions Judge was not justified in filing complaint against the petitioner without giving him an opportunity of being heard. Unfortunately, in this case, the learned Sessions Judge did not issue any notice of show cause. The petitioner learnt about the criminal prosecution after he got summons from the Court of Sri K.C. Prasad, Munsif -Magistrate of Giridih. The trying Magistrate convicted the accused. Thereafter he filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge who found the evidence given by the petitioner as unreliable and directed the filing of complaint against the petitioner in the judgement by virtue of the powers conferred on the appellate Court under the provisions of Section 479 -A(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which reads as follows :