KALYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No one has appeared for the petitioner, although the case was called first time in the morning and then again, after the tea interval.

(2.) I have, therefore, perused the application of the petitioner and gone through the order passed against him. I have also perused the order dated 24th July, 1978 in which the order was given that the petitioner should be proceeded with under S. 344 Crimial P.C., Notice given to the petitioner in pursuance of that, order dated 7th Oct., 1978 was also perused.

(3.) The petitioner was examined as PW 8 by the prosecution and finding of the learned Munsif Magistrate (Railway), Bikaner is that while appearing as witness he has perjured with the motive to help the accused and it is in the interest of justice that proceedings should be taken against him under S. 344, Crimial P.C. and notice should be given for that. The contention raised by the petitioner-applicant is that there is no finding of the court that his prosecution is necessary and expedient in the interest of justice as per the requirement of S. 344, Crimial P.C. I am convinced that the learned magistrate was convinced that the prosecution of the petitioner is necessary in the interest of justice as he has perjured deliberately in order to help the accused.