(1.) By this criminal miscellaneous petition moved under Sec. 482, Crimial P.C. petitioner Ramesh Kumar has challenged the finding recorded by the learned Chief Judl. Magistrate, Jodhpur in Criminal Case No. 118/93 whereby, in para 16 of the judgment, the trial Court took cognizance under Sec. 344(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner for making false statement on oath before the Court in criminal trial conducted against accused Naresh Singh and Smt. Rajbala. The petitioner was examined in the trial as D.W. 2.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the order impugned. I have also carefully gone through the statement of petitioner Ramesh Kumar recorded by the trial Court.
(3.) The petitioner has proved certain memos prepared by the Food Inspector at the time of taking sample from the shop of accused Naresh Singh and Smt. Rajbala. The petitioner has admitted his signatures on the various memos viz., Ex.. 8, Ex. 9, Ex. 10 and Ex. 12 vide which sample was taken by the Food Inspector, PW. 1. PC. Harsh. It appears that on certain points this witness (petitioner herein) failed to support the prosecution case for which the trial Court was of the view that the petitioner has deliberately made incorrect statement before the Court. On a careful perusal of the entire statement of the petitioner it appears that the petitioner has a pan shop adjacent to the shop run by accused Naresh Singh and Smt. Rajbala. The petitioner stated that there was rush in the shop and, in good faith, having believed the version of P.W. 1 P.C. Harsh he put his signatures on various memos prepared by the Food Inspector. To some extent the petitioner has also supported the prosecution case. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the order taking cognizance under Sec. 344(1), Cr.RC. against the petitioner is more than warranted in the circumstances and, therefore, cannot be i sustained.