RAM CHANDER PANDEY Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this application may shortly be stated as follows: One Ramnaresh Pandey laid a first information against certain persons at the Arrah mofussil police station. The investigating Sub-Inspector reported the information to be false. Ramnaresh then filed in the Court of a Magistrate a petition which was in substance a complaint that the persona named by him in the first information had committed theft. The persons so accused were put on their trial and acquitted the trial Court holding that the complaint against them was both false and vexatious. Accordingly the Magistrate called upon the complainant to show cause why he should not pay Rs. 25 as compensation to each of the persons whom he had falsely accused. The cause shown was not considered satisfactory and the complainant was ordered to pay the compensation mentioned above: in default of payment he was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a month.

(2.) Against that order the complainant appealed to the Sessions Judge of Shahabad but died before the appeal was heard. The appeal however was prosecuted by his son Ramchander Pandey, who, together with his own sons and his cousin and the latter's sons, constituted a joint Hindu family of which Ramnaresh was also a member up to the time of his death. The Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal and the Magistrate who had tried the case then called upon Ramchander Pandey to pay the compensation for which his father had originally been nude liable. Ramchander objected that he was not liable to pay the compensation. This objection was overruled. He then moved the Sessions Judge to refer the matter to this Court. This prayer was refused.

(3.) Ramchander then applied to this Court in revision and a rule was issued to the District Magistrate to show cause why the order complained against should not be sat aside. At the hearing of this rule no one has appeared in support of the order of the lower Court. By reason of the provisions of Section 547, Criminal P.C., money ordered to be paid as compensation under Section 250 is recoverable as if it were a fine; and the methods of recovering a fine are provided by Section 386. Under that section action for the recovery of a fine may be taken in either or both of the following ways, that is to say: (a) by issue of a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any moveable property belonging to the offender; and (b) by issue of a warrant to the Collector of the District authorizing him to realize the amount by execution, according to civil process, against the moveable and immovable properties, or both, of the defaulter.