1. As regards the sanction for prosecution under S. 182, I.P.C, neither the police officer nor the Sub-Magistrate to whom the reports, Exs. H and H-1, were sent is a subordinate of the Sessions Judge within the meaning of Section 195, Clause 7 of the Cr PC, so that the Sessions Judge's order of sanction is ultra vires.
2. The same must be said of the order sanctioning prosecution for an offence under S. 193, I.P.C, in giving contradictory statements.
3. It is necessary that a Court granting sanction in such circumstances should be empowered to sanction prosecution in respect of each of the statements said to be contradictory of each other. In the present case one of the two contradictory statements was made before the Sub-Magistrate in the course of a local inquiry under Section 164 of the Cr PC, and for the reason above indicated, the Sessions Judge had no power to give sanction in respect of this.
4. The sanction is set aside. It is open to the Public Prosecutor to apply to the Sub-Magistrate for a fresh sanction in respect of the two statements made before him.
S.N/R.K
5. Satiation set aside.