APPADURAI NAINAR Vs. SAMPATH RAO NAINAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application to quash the commitment of accused 2 to 4 in P.R.C. No. 13 of 1934 on the file of the Second Class Magistrate's Court, Wandiwash in the following circumstances.

(2.) A suit on a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the complainant in the case was instituted against him before a Panchayat Court by the first accused. The writer of the promissory note is accused 2 and accused 3 and 4 are the attestors. For the purpose of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition it may be taken that the suit was dismissed by the Panchayat Court on the ground that the promissory note was a forgery. Subsequent to its dismissal, a complaint with respect to an offence under Section 467, Indian Penal Code (forgery of a valuable security) was filed against the plaintiff in the case who is the first accused, and accused 2, 3 and 4 who are as already stated the writer and the attestors of the promissory note. On a preliminary objection on behalf of the first accused the case against him was not proceeded with for want of a complaint from the Panchayat Court to take cognizance of the offence and an order was passed to that effect on 23 November, 1934, dismissing the complaint against him. The preliminary objection on behalf of the first accused was based on Section 195(1) Criminal Procedure Code, which says that: No Court shall take cognizance of any offence described in Section 463, Indian Penal Code, (forgery) etc., when such offence is alleged to have been committed by a party to any proceeding in any Court in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in such proceeding except on the complaint in writing of such Court or of some other Court to which such Court is subordinate.

(3.) As the Panchayat Court had not filed a complaint, it was argued that Section 195(1)(b) was a bar to proceedings against the first accused as the offence is alleged to have been committed by him who was a party to a proceedings in the Panchayat Court and this argument was accepted. The case against accused 2 to 4 was proceeded with and they have been committed for trial to the Sessions Court.