MUNSHI ISSER Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Rule calling on the District Magistrate to show cause why the order complained of in this petition should not be set aside on the ground that the complaint of the petitioner has not been disposed of according to law, and on the ground that the Magistrate had jurisdiction under Section 190, Criminal Procedure Code, to refuse to take cognisance of the offence.

(2.) The facts are that the first petitioner laid an information stating that certain persons had formed an unlawful assembly and had assaulted the informant and another person. This was investigated by the Police, but the petitioner was dissatisfied with the way in which the Police were conducting the investigation and they complained to the Magistrate that the Police were not doing their duty. The Police reported that the information given by the petitioner was false, and a sanction to prosecute the first petitioner for laying a false information under Section 182, Indian Penal Code, and against the second petitioner for abetting that offence appears to have been granted by the Inspector of Police purporting to act under Section 195 of the Criminal P. C..

(3.) Now the petitioners put in a further petition asking that the evidence that they had to give in support of their charge might be taken. But that petition was rejected by the Magistrate on the ground that there being this sanction to prosecute he must take cognizance of the charge against the petitioners for laying false information and he declined to go into the charge which they had made on the ground that they had had no opportunity of proving the truth of it before the Police.