KESHARINANDAN RAMANI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Kesharinandan moved this Court against an order of the District Magistrate directing his prosecution for an offence under Section 193, I.P.C., passed in an appeal from the order of the Sub-Deputy Magistrate of Patna City refusing to take action under the provisions of Section 476, Criminal P.C. Upon the appeal being placed for final hearing before Judge of this Court, a preliminary objection was taken on behalf of the Crown that the appellant ought to have appealed to the Sessions Judge before coming to this Court. The objection was apparently based upon the decision of this Court in Ranjit Narain Singh V/s. Ram Bahadur 1926.13 A.I.R. Pat 81 which was followed in Narayan Meher V/s. Dhana Meher A.I.R.1931. Pat 343. It was brought to the notice of the learned Judge before whom this objection was taken that this view of the law had been dissented from in almost every other High Court in India whereupon he referred the case to a Division Bench, which, in view of the importance of the question involved, have referred the matter to this Full Bench.

(2.) Before dealing with the cases which cluster round the section, it is necessary to read and consider the relevant sections themselves. Section 476 is a general Section which gives the Court (civil, criminal or revenue) the right to take action against any person where the Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in Section 195, and it also empowers such a Court, after any preliminary inquiry which it may deem fit to make and after recording a finding to the effect that it isexpedient in the interests of justice to do so, to make a com. plaint in writing as provided in the section.

(3.) It is important to note that the concluding words of the section, which have given rise to some confusion, are that after a complaint has been made, the Court shall forward the same to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction, arid may take sufficient security for the appearance of the accused before such Magistrate, or, if the alleged offence is nonbailable, may send the accused in custody to such Magistrate, and may bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate.