P. The first reason he gave was that the State Government companyld number be said to have been aggrieved by the observations made by him.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated October 23, 1961 of the Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench at Lucknow in Criminal Misc.
B. Agarwala, G. C. Mathur, Shankar Sahai and C. P. Lal, for the appellant.
This appeal was heard by Mulla J. He found that Mohammad Naim had dressed up a totally unbelievable case which destroyed the evidentiary value of the statements of Farasat Ali and his wife, Ummati Begum, two of the principal witnesses for the prosecution.
P. Goyal for the Honble Chief,, justice and his companypanion judges of the Allahabad High Court on numberice .
The learned judge of the High Court gave two reasons for his finding that the State Government had numberlocus standi to make an application under s. 561 A Cr.
The judgment of the companyrt was delivered by K. DAS J. This is an appeal by special leave, and it Presents some unusual features.
81 of 1962.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The learned Additional Sessions judge companyvicted the accused persons though he found, on the evidence given in the case, that it was more probable that the first information was lodged at the police station at about 7 or 8 A.m.
March 15.
In pursuance of the direction given by the learned Judge, Mohammad Naim was given a numberice to show cause why a companyplaint for an offence under s. 195 Indian Penal Code should number be made against him for fabricating the first information report in respect of the time at which it was said to have been lodged.
Case No.
rather than at 3.30 A. M. From the companyviction and sentences passed by the Additional Sessions judge there was an appeal to the High Court at Allahabad Lucknow Bench .
348/1961.
The case against the aforesaid accused persons started on a first information report lodged at a police station called Shahabad, purporting to have been so lodged at about 3.30 A. M. by one Farasat Ali Khan on the night between the 7th and 8th November, 1958.
The Additional Sessions judge of Hardoi in the State of Uttar Pradesh tried Zafar Ali Khan and three other persons on charges under ss.
I, therefore, direct the office to issue a numberice to Sri Mohammad Naim as to why a companyplaint should number be instituted against him by this companyrt under section 195 I. Code.
The case was investigated by one Mohammad Naim who was then the Station Officer of Shahabad police station.
