SUJAUDDIN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by one Sujauddin against an order directing a complaint to be preferred against him for having committed offences under Secs.193, 465, 471 and 109, I.P.C. It appears that one Padam Prosad was in August of last year acquitted on a charge under Section 372, I.P.C , of selling a minor girl and that at the trial of that accused a certain certified copy was produced from the register of births at Benares. It is said that the copy which was produced by the defence had been tampered with and that it was a false document the subject-matter of forgery within the meaning of the Code. Thereupon the complainant in the case applied to the Magistrate who tried the matter against three persons two of them were named, Padam Prosad and Behari Lal, and one was unnamed but his character and description were indicated, namely, that he was a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Births at Benares. The Magistrate directed a police investigation and after considering the whole matter made up his mind that he would not prefer any complaint. The complainant appealed to the High Court and the High Court made a complaint against Padam Prosad and Behari Lal. Thereupon the complaint so preferred came on for hearing or investigation before the Chief Presidency Magistrate and he after a lapse of some time, namely, in October last, directed the Public Prosecutor to apply to the successor of the Magistrate who had tried the case for a complaint to be made against the present appellant, Sujauddin and one Kanhaiyalal. On 11th October this complaint was made.

(2.) The appellant appeals and he takes his stand upon the circumstance that the question whether any complaint should be made was discussed before the Magistrate who had actually tried the case and the matter having gone to the High Court a complaint was directed against two persons only and not against him.

(3.) Mr. Bhattacharjya for the Crown says, first of all, that it is not necessary when once a complaint has been made against certain persons in respect of an offence that another complaint should be made against other persons whom the Magistrate finds to be necessary parties as persons implicated in the offence. He contends before us that complaints are not made against specific offenders but of offences and that once a complaint is made the Magistrate conducting the enquiry has to proceed under Section 200, Criminal P.C., and there is no objection whatsoever to his directing summonses to issue against persons other than those specifically named in the complaint if he finds that this is necessary for the ends of justice. In support of this contention he refers to the decision of a Division Bench of this Court Giridhari Lal V/s. Emperor [1917] 21 C.W.N. 950. He further contends that even if it be not the case that this complaint is supererogatory, the Magistrate in the present case was well warranted in making a complaint against Sujauddin.