BINDESHWAR ROY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Sessions Judge has set aside the order of the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code against opposite party No. 2. The complainant -petitioner has come to this Court in revision.

(2.) THE Sessions Judge has taken the view that since the complaint relates to filing of a forged document punishable under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code, an offence described in Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. in view of the provisions of Section 195, private complaint was not maintainable. He has also observed that the document on the basis of which the complainant claims his right and interest has not been brought on record. None of the two grounds is tenable.

(3.) AS regards the other ground assigned by the Sessions Judge that the documents have not been produced by the complainant, I may observe that this is a matter which pertains to the defence in the case. It is needless to emphasise that if a document, which is the basis of the claim is not produced, that Will be to the determent of the party and in that case the Court Will be free to draw its inferences and conclusions. Moreso, in a criminal case where the prosecution has to make out a fool proof case. Besides, it is open to the accused to adduce evidence of his own in defence.