KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will deal with an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short, the Code), which was filed in the following circumstances.

(2.) KRISHAN Kumar Sharma and Basant Kumar Sharma, petitioners herein, are Managing Director and Executive Director, respectively, of M/s Starit Water Treatment Company Limited, Bombay. P. N. Bijai, respondent 2 herein, is Administrative Officer of General Engineering Works, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. On April 8, 1977, P. N. Bijai made a complaint in writing to the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bharatpur, alleging that the petitioners had committed offences against section 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and praying they be punished accordingly. The learned Magistrate forwarded this complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, Kotwali Police State, Bharatpur, with an order directing the said officer to register the case as, in the opinion of the learned Magistrate, it disclosed a cognizable offence. The learned Magistrate further directed the said Officer-in-charge to make investigation according to law. He made it clear in his order that he himself did not take cognizance because the offence being cognizable, he was directing investigation into it in accordance with the provisions of section 156 (3) of the Code.

(3.) THESE facts, as gathered from the record, reveal that the petitioners cannot possibly have any legitimate grievance either against the conduct of the investigation conducted by the police or issue of the warrants of arrest by the Magistrate during the said investigation. As regards the petitioner's complaint that the investigation undertaken by the police and the warrants issued by the Magistrate amount to an abuse of the process of the Court, the said allegation has only to be stated for its rejection. Let alone the petitioners being victims of the so-called abuse of the process of the Court, they have themselves, on the other hand, abused the process of this Court by resorting to suppressio veri and suggestio falsi. They had concealed from the Court, the fact that they were required by the Bombay High Court to appear before the learned Magistrate at Bharatpur on April 3, 1978. They made a false allegation that criminal case No. 120/77 before the learned Magistrate, Bharatpur. Their application under Section 482 of the Code deserves dismissal on these grounds alone, but, having regard to the vehement and lengthy arguments addressed on their behalf by Mr. Tiwari, I am inclined to examine the arguments, albeit briefly.