NARAIN SINGH Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 476-B, Criminal P.C., against an order of the learned District Judge of Moradabad, directing that "a complaint be drafted under Secs.193, 196,465, 467 and 471, Indian Penal Code, against the appellant and forwarded to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Moradabad, for disposal." The facts which have led to this order are briefly these:

(2.) One Suraj Singh, son of Narain Singh, was fined Rs. 11,260, although the maximum; amount of fine, which could be imposed under Sec. 45, Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, was Rs. 500. Certain property, alleged to belong to Surajj Singh, was attached in execution of an order for the realisation of the fine. Narain Singh took exception to the attachment on the ground that the property had passed to him. In support of his objection, Narain Singh produced, in the Court, a receipt. One Abdul Ghani made a statement on 3 February 1945 in support of Narain Singh's version. The receipt was sent to the Master Security Printing Press, Nasik, for inspection. His report was that the date of the stamp was later than the date of the receipt. In other words, it was not a genuine document. This report was received on 6 March 1945 and on 4 June 1945, the learn, ed District Judge sent a notice to Narain. Singh to show cause why his prosecution should not be ordered. A similar notice, on 3 Sep. tember 1945, was issued against Abdul Ghani., The learned Judge finally, by his order of 1 September 1945, directed the prosecution of Narain Singh and by a similar order of 16 March 1946, he directed the prosecution of Abdul Ghani.

(3.) Both Naiain Singh and Abdul Ghani ara before us in appeal. F.A.F.O. No. 298 of 1945 is the appeal preferred by Narain Singh, whereas F.A.F.O. No. 1 of 1947 is the appeal of Abdul Ghani.