JAGDISH PRASAD SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under S.341, Cr.P.C. against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara dated 31/08/1992 by which he has directed that a complaint under S.193, I.P.C. be filed against the witness-appellant Dr. Jagdish Prasad Singhal in the competent Court. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus.

(2.) In Criminal case No. 768 / 83 - State v. Kishanlal and Dilip Nagar under S. 16 read with S. 7, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, the appellant appeared as a prosecution witness and his statement was recorded. The accused were convicted. They filed an appeal in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara. While deciding the appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara Shri Budhmal Bhojak, held that the appellant has given false statement and directed that a notice be issued to him to show cause as to why a complaint under S.193, I.P.C. be not filed against him. In compliance thereof, notice was issued to the appellant. After hearing him, the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara directed that a complaint be filed against him under S. 193, I.P.C. by his order dated 31/08/1992 which is under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the notice issued to the appellant was no notice in the eye of law as it did not specify the portions which were found false and on this ground alone the impugned order deserves to be quashed. He relied upon S.P. Kohli v. High Court of Punjab and Haryana, AIR 1978 SC 1753 : (1978 Cri LJ 1804). He further contended that appellant's statement was recorded about 10 years ago and as such it would not be expedient in the interest of justice to remand the case for deciding it afresh after giving proper notice to him. 3A. The learned P.P. duly supported the order under challenge.