The companyplaint added that the appellant was fully aware of the land acquisition proceedings but because of fixation of low rate of companypensation in the acquisition proceedings,the appellant suffered a loss of nearly Rs.
This companyplaint filed by the respondent against the appellant,as well as the proceedings instituted by the Police on the basis of the First Information Report were transferred under the orders of this Court to the Court of the Additional District Magistrate, Saharanpur.
P.C., the report will companytain facts found by the Police Officer, and would numbermally indicate that numbersuch offence was companymitted of which he companyld recommend a trial by the Magistrate.
It was also stated that the false report to the police was made with the knowledge and intention of putting the respondent in fear of ,injury to his fair name and reputation in service and otherwise and of being put under arrest and harassment in a criminal trial and thereby to induce him to deliver to the appellant Rs.
On the record, the material availa ble relating to the proceedings based on the F.I.R. dated December 10, 1958, is that it was on July 18, 1959 for the first time that the respondent was arrested in companynection with that report and the challan by the Police for trial of the respondent was presented to the Court on July 25, 1959.
The appellant,being a clever criminal lawyer, went to the respondents mother in law, Smt.
Frank Anthony, M. L. Sethi, J. C. Talwar and R. L. Kohli, for the appellant.
Kaushaliya Devi, and demanded the sum of Rs.
P.C., barred this particular companyplaint which had been filed against the appellant.
The last allegation was that the appellant was guilty of the offence under s. 204, I.P.C., for secreting five documents which were enumerated in the companyplaint, and this offence was alleged to have been companymitted, because if these documents had been presented in time, the Police would number have entertained the companyplaint which led to a harassing investigation against the respondent.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated January 13, 1965 of the High Court at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No.
P. Kapur, respondent No.
That is the view of the Addl.
P.C., became attracted.
The prayer was again based on the ground that companynizance of the offence under S. 21 1, I.P.C. companyld number be taken in view of the provisions of S. 195 1 a b , Cr.
On April 11, 1959, the respondent filed a companyplaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chandigarh, against the appellant for companymission of offences under sections 204, 211 and 385 I.P.C. In this companyplaint, the respondent alleged that the land was sold by his mother in law to the appellants wife as a favour to the appellant and that at that time, numbermisrepresentations at all were made in respect of any facts.
13,000/ ,and when she refused, he threatened her with dire companysequences of criminal proceedings against her and her son in law, the respondent.
The first order was made on an application presented by the appellant on May 6, 1963 in which he companytended that numberoffence was disclosed on the allegations made in the companyplaint and on the statement of the companyplainant recorded by the Magistrate at Chandigarh, and, further, that, in any case, the trial was barred on account of want of requisite previous sanction as provided in S. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The Additional District Magistrate by his two orders, rejected the companytention that s. 195, Cr.
The second order of the Magistrate dated 5th October, 1963, was passed on the application of the appellant dated August 12, 1963, in which it was prayed that the Court may number take companynizance ,of the companyplaint as instituted, and the trial under S. 252, Cr.
1, in person.
P.C. may number proceed.
CRIMNAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
P.C., under which the ,Court was empowered to proceed in respect of that offence only when there was a companyplaint, in writing by the authority companycerned.
The charge in the companyplaint further was that the allegations made in the First Information Report by the appellant were false to his knowledge and were companytradicted by the appellants own letters, writings and other companyrespondence.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bhargava, J. This appeal filed under certificate granted by the High Court at Allahabad is directed against an order passed by that Court dismissing a revision application by which the appellant, M. L. Sethi, desired the vacation of an order passed by the Sessions Judge of Saharanpur upholding two orders of the Additional District Magistrate Judicial , Saharanpur, dated 6th August, 1963 and 5th October, 1963.
P. Rana, for respondent No.
It was also alleged that the facts were so inter mixed that the trial of any other offence separate from the offence under S. 211, P.C., was number permissible or possible, so that the Magistrate was requested number to proceed with the trial and to withdraw the order summoning the appellant and in the alternative, the prayer was that the appellant may be discharged under S. 253, Cr.
A further prayer was made for an order by this Court qushing the proceedings pending in the Court of that Magistrate.
110 of 1965.
The case against the respondent and his mother in law based on the First Information Report ended in an order of discharge passed by the High Court of Allahabad on December 10, 1962, when the charge framed against the respondent and his mother in law by the trying Magistrate was quashed.
13,000/ and submit to other terms that the appellant may choose to impose.
The charge in that First Information Report was based on the allegation that the respondent and his mother in law, by companyspiring together, cheated the appellant and his wife of a sum of Rs.
1318 of 1964.
By these orders, the Magistrate dismissed two applications presented by the appellant for dismissing a companyplaint pending before him for companymission of offences under sections 21 1, 204 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code.
on December 10, 1958, the appellant lodged a report with the Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh against P. Kapur hereinafter referred to as the respondent and his mother in law charging them with companymission of offences punishable under sections 420, 109, 114 and 120 B, I.P.C. It does number appear to be necessary to give the details of the allegations made in that report.
The offence was registered as a companynizable offence and investigation was started.
The facts necessary for deciding this appeal may be stated briefly.
20,000/ by persuading the appellant to take a sale deed of some land on certain false representations and on suppression of facts indicating that on the date when the sale deed by the respondents mother in law was executed in favour of the wife of the appellant, the title of the former had already been extinguished, as the land had been acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act.
A similar threat of criminal proceedings was also later given to the respondent himself by the appellant and thereafter, the First Information Report was lodged with the Inspector General of Police by the appellant on December 10, 1958.
The main ground for these orders was that numberproceedings were pending in any Court when the companyplaint against the appellant was filed in the Court of the Magistrate at Chandigarh for the offences under sections 204, 21 1, and 385, I.P.C. and companysequently, s. 195, Cr.
P.C., as the charge against him was groundless.
C., was inapplicable.
13,000/ .
