MANOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) If a false document is filed in the proceedings of a case whether the Court is entitled to lodge a report with the police for registration of an FIR or for that matter it has to proceed to lodge a complaint u/S. 195 read with S. 476, Cr.P.C.; is the question arising for consideration in this petition u/S. 561-A, Cr.P.C.

(2.) A murder trial is being conducted in the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge Jammu in case entitled State v. Balwant Singh and others in which one of the accused is Gandharab Singh. Gandharab Singh is in custody as an under trial prisoner. On his behalf an application was filed for grant of bail by the petitioner herein, Manohar Singh, brother of the accused. Bail was sought on the ground that wife of the accused had sustained injury in consequence of which she stood admitted in the hospital at Chandigarh. In suport of the application a medical certificate was also filed. The prosecution disputed the genuineness of the certificate during the course of hearing of application and communication was filed for indicating that the certificate was false. Learned Sessions Judge taking note of the falsity of the certificate rejected the bail application by his order dated 2-5-2003. The prosecution filed an applicatlon before the trial Court seeking registration of a case against the persons involved in submission and preparation of fake certificate in the said bail application. Learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 3-5-2003 allowed the prayer of the prosecution and direction for tranmission of the petition in original to S.S.P. Crime Branch, Jammu for registration of case and investigation along with Photostat copies of the reports placed on the file, Photostat copy of the report attested on 29-4-2003, Photostat copy of the application moved by the accused Gandarab Singh through his brother Manohar Singh and Photostat copy of the confidential report received from the concerned authority. This order passed by the Sessions Judge is the subject matter of challenge in this petition.

(3.) Undisputedly on the motion of the learned Pr. Sessions Judge an FIR has been registered by the Crime Branch for commission of offences under Sections 420, 468, 193, 467, 471 and 120-B R.P.C. The contention of Mr. Goni learned counsel for the petitioner is that when the Sessions Judge formulated an opinion that the document filed with the bail application was false he ought to have followed the procedure prescribed in Sections 195 and 476, Cr.P.C. and thereafter he should have made a complaint against the accused for their trial instead of asking for lodging the FIR. In support of his contention he relies upon AIR 1983 SC 1053: (1983 Cri LJ 1599).