TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he above position has emerged also, still the court has to form an opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice to initiate an inquiry into the offences of false evidence and offences against public justice and more specifically referred in Section 340(1) of the CrPC, having regard to the overall factual matrix as well as the probable consequences of such a prosecution. In the interests of justice the matter needs to be laid to rest. The appeal is hence allowed. The impugned order to the extent of initiation of the proceedings under Section 340 of the CrPC is set aside - decided in favor of appellant. - Civil Appeal No. 11120 Of 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 13749 of 2016) - - - Dated:- 23-11-2016 - Kurian Joseph And Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. JUDGMENT Kurian, Leave granted. The scope of this appeal is limited to the challenge on legality of the proceedings under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code ) initiated by the High Court as part of the impugned judgment dated 12th/13th April, 2016 in Appeal from Order No. 489 of 2013 on the file of the High Court of Gujarat. The appeal before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... litigations which go on for years together. 20. In the instant case also, the respondent No.1 defendant No.1 after requesting the trial Court to reopen his right to file written statement, and after filing written statement at Exh.20 along with the affidavit and declaration supporting the case of the appellant plaintiff, had filed an application at Exh. 43, requesting the trial Court to de-exhibit the earlier written statement at Exh. 20 by stating, inter alia, that the said written statement was filed by the Advocate Ms. Trupti Patel on his behalf without his knowledge. The said Application at Exh. 43 was rejected by the trial Court, which order has remained unchallenged. All these documents namely the written statement at Exh. 20 with affidavit and declaration and the other written statement and the affidavit filed before the trial Court have also been produced by the learned Counsels for the parties in the present proceedings and have been relied upon by them, to support their respective contentions. From the said documents on record, it clearly transpires that the respondent No.1 defendant No.1 had sought to produce two sets of documents contradictory to each other, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary,- (a) record a finding to that effect; (b) make a complaint thereof in writing; (c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction; (d) take sufficient security for the appearance of the accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non-bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do, send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and (e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate. There are two pre conditions for initiating proceedings under Section 340 CrPC (i) materials produced before the court must make out a prima facie case for a complaint for the purpose of inquiry into an offence referred to in clause (b)(i) of sub-Section (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Section 195(1)(b), as the section is conditioned by the words court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice . This shows that such a course will be adopted only if the interest of justice requires and not in every case. Before filing of the complaint, the court may hold a preliminary enquiry and record a finding to the effect that it is expedient in the interests of justice that enquiry should be made into any of the offences referred to in Section 195(1)(b). This expediency will normally be judged by the court by weighing not the magnitude of injury suffered by the person affected by such forgery or forged document, but having regard to the effect or impact, such commission of offence has upon administration of justice. It is possible that such forged document or forgery may cause a very serious or substantial injury to a person in the sense that it may deprive him of a very valuable property or status or the like, but such document may be just a piece of evidence produced or given in evidence in court, where voluminous evidence may have been adduced and the effect of such piece of evidence on the broad concept of administration of justice may be minimal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
