S.S.GREWAL,J - (1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of Special Judge, Patiala, dated 19th of December, 1991 whereby application under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for initiating enquiry against Dharam Singh, DSP (respondent) was dismissed.
(2.) IN brief facts relevant for the disposal of this case are that a case against the present petitioners was registered vide F.I.R. No. 179 dated 13th of May, 1982 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at Police Station, Samana, for keeping in their possession four drums of diesel and one drum of kerosene oil without dealers licence. Both the petitioners were tried under Section 7 of the Act and were acquitted vide order of special Judge, Patiala, dated 9th of January, 1987. In order of acquittal the learned Special Judge while dealing with the evidence of Dharam Singh and the application under Section 340 of the Code moved on behalf of the present petitioners observed as follows : "Though MHC Jaswant Singh has taken this stand that he was on leave on the day of raid and the case property was not deposited with him nor he made any statement before the Investigating Officer in this behalf but strangely enough not only an affidavit of MHC Jaswant Singh regarding the deposit of the case property with him on 13.5.82 was placed on the file but also Sh.Dharam Singh deposed that he correctly recorded the statement of MHC Jaswant Singh on 18.6.82 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. regarding the deposit of the case property with him. The defence has urged that Sh. Dharam Singh tried to create false evidence and thus, he was guilty of an offence under Section 193 Indian Penal Code. In order to take action against him, the defence has also moved an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. notice of which is being given to Shri Dharam Singh separately, because it is expedient to hold enquiry in this behalf." Admittedly no further proceedings took place before the trial Judge. The application under Section 340 of the Code moved by the petitioners was subsequently dismissed by the successor court with the following observations: "Sufficient material appearing in evidence was available with said Special Judge but still he did not feel any necessity for taking cognizance of the offence under Section 193 Indian Penal Code and on the face of it no enquiry is required to be conducted." It was further observed that: "As no cognizance of the offence under Section 193 Indian Penal Code was taken against the offender/witness by the trial Court, although sufficient material was available with him and accused were acquitted of the charges on the basis of the evidence furnished by Dharam Singh DSP and now to my mind, it is too late to take any action or initiate any inquiry against the offender/witness by this Court." Aggrieved against the order of the Special Judge, dated 19.12.1991, the petitioners have filed the present revision petition.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the parties were heard.;