(1.) In this ease criminal proceedings were taken against the molainant Harendra Nath Chatterjee by the petitioners Profulla Kumar Ghose and Jogesh Chandra Sarkar under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate who enquired into the complaint in those proceedings came to the conclusion that it could not be substantiated and discharged the accused person Harendra Nath Chatterjee. Thereupon Harendra Nath Chatterjee applied for sanction under Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prosecute Pro-fulla Chandra Ghose and Jogesh Chandra Sarkar under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code, and in the alternative asked for process against these two persons under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate refused sanction under Section 195 to Harendra-Nath Chatterjee to prosecute the petitioners under Section 211, but granted process under Section 500.
(2.) An application was made to this Court by Mr. Monmotha Nath Mukherjae on behalf of the petitioners Profulla Kumar Ghose and Jogesh Chandra Sarkar, and he obtained a Rule which was granted on two grounds. The first ground was that the facts alleged in the petition of the opposite party did not disclose any offence under Section 500, Indian Penal Code, or 500/109, Indian Penal Code." The second ground was that the petition for sanction to prosecute under Section 211, Indian Penal Code, having been rejected the petitioners ought not to be proceeded against under Section 500 or 500/109, 1 ndian Penal Code, on the same facts."
(3.) The Magistrate has sent an explanation with regard to that Rule, and after setting out what occurred he said thus: "As I found prima facie no lawful and reasonable ground for the action taken by the petitioners against the said Harendra Nath Chatterjee under Section 409, Indian Penal Code, and the allegations in the petition of complaint in reference to the same charge were not made in good faith, I ordered the issue of process under Section 500, Indian Penal Code."