PREGADA BALANAGU Vs. KROSURU KOTAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I do not think the Sub. divisional Magistrate was right in holding that the sanction of Government was necessary in this case under Section 197, Criminal P.C. In sending his report under Section 45, the Village Munsif is not acting in his capacity as Magistrate, being there called specifically a Village Headman, nor is he a public servant removable only by or with the sanction of a Local Government: see Pichai Pillai V/s. Balasundara Mudali AIR 1935 Mad 442. But the Sub-divisional Magistrate might well have dismissed the complaint under Section 203 after putting a few questions to the complainant. It is a complaint filed five months after the police investigation was over, and a mere glance at it is enough to show that the complainant has made no serious attempt at stating any facts which if proved in evidence would support a conviction. In these circumstances I see no reason to interfere and dismiss this petition.