9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntended that the pay scale of Engineering Assistants was revised from Rs. 2000/¬ to Rs. 3000/¬ with effect from 01.01.1986, by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting by its decision dated 15.05.1995. The pay scale of Senior Engineering Assistant was revised from Rs. 2000/¬ to Rs. 3275/¬ with effect from 01.01.1986. It is his case that replacement pay scale of all the categories, with effect from 01.01.1996, was fixed at Rs. 6500/¬ to Rs. 10,500/¬. The Employees Association of the concerned cadre, upon coming into force of Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme, had represented for grant of 1 st ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 8000/¬ to 13,500/¬ which was not being allowed, which led to the filing of an application before Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench (for short 'the CAT'). This gave rise to O.A. No. 514 of 2002. The said O.A. was allowed by the CAT, by an order dated 07.09.2009. 4. The Union of India challenged the said order by filing a writ petition before the High Court. The High Court allowed the writ petition with an observation that no generalized direction could be given for the grant of ACP and the ACP has to be gra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bihar and Anr., (1998) 2 SCC 493. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submits that the punishment for offence giving false evidence in judicial proceedings is stipulated in Section 193 of the IPC and the law governing taking of the cognizance of such an offence is contained in Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. puts a clear bar on taking of cognizance by a Court, of an offence punishable under Section 193 of the IPC, unless it is on a complaint in writing of the Court or such officer of the Court as that Court may authorize in writing in this behalf, in relation to a judicial proceeding of which Court, the offence is alleged to have been committed. Since no such complaint has been made, the High Court was justified in quashing the order of the Magistrate. In this connection, reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in M.S. Ahlawat v. State of Haryana and another, (2000) 1 SCC 278. 9. Having regard to the contentions urged, the question for consideration is whether the Magistrate was justified in taking cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 193 of the IPC on the basis of a private complaint? 10. Befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate; (b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or (ii) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in sub¬clause (i) or sub¬ clause (ii),[except on the complaint in writing of that Court or by such officer of the Court as that Court may authorise in writing in this behalf, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate]. (2) Where a complaint has been made by a public servant under clause (a) of sub¬ section (1) any authority to which he is administratively subordinate may order the withdrawa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relates to offences in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court. 14. Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. lays down a rule to be followed by the court which is to take cognizance of an offence specified therein but contains no direction for the guidance of the court which desires to initiate prosecution in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in the latter court. For that purpose, one must turn to Section 340 which requires the court desiring to put the law in motion to prefer a complaint either suo motu or an application made to it in that behalf. 15. Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. reads as follows: "340. Procedure in cases mentioned in Section 195.-(1) When, upon an application made to it in this behalf 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same appears to be deliberate and conscious. It emphatically held as under: "7. The prosecution for perjury should be sanctioned by courts only in those cases where the perjury appears to be deliberate and conscious and the conviction is reasonably probable or likely. No doubt giving of false evidence and filing false affidavits is an evil which must be effectively curbed with a strong hand but to start prosecution for perjury too readily and too frequently without due care and caution and on inconclusive and doubtful material defeats its very purpose. Prosecution should be ordered when it is considered expedient in the interests of justice to punish the delinquent and not merely because there is some inaccuracy in the statement which may be innocent or immaterial. There must be prima facie case of deliberate falsehood on a matter of substance and the court should be satisfied that there is reasonable foundation for the charge......" 18. In Santokh Singh v. Izhar Hussain and Anr., (1973) 2 SCC 406, this Court has held that every incorrect or false statement does not make it incumbent on the court to order prosecution. The Court has to exercise judicial discretion in the light ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to proceed under Section 340 CrPC and a complaint outside the provisions of Section 340 CrPC cannot be filed by any civil, revenue or criminal court under its inherent jurisdiction." (emphasis supplied) 20. As already mentioned, clauses under Section 195(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. i.e. sub-section 195(1)(b)(i) and sub¬section 195(1)(b)(ii) cater to separate offences. Though Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. is a generic section for offences committed under Section 195(1)(b), the same has different and exclusive application to clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 195(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. 21. In Sachida Nand Singh (supra) relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court was considering the question as to whether the bar contained in Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Cr.P.C. is applicable to a case where forgery of the document was committed before the document was produced in a court. It was held: "6. A reading of the clause reveals two main postulates for operation of the bar mentioned there. First is, there must be allegation that an offence (it should be either an offence described in Section 463 or any other offence punishable under Sections 471, 475, 476 of the IPC) ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
