K.S Kumaran, J.:— Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner herein preferred a complaint to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Haryana against the Manager of the Ambala-Kurukshetra Gramin Bank at Sabepur vide Annexure P-1 dated 14.2.95 This compliant was forwarded by the Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Haryana to the Deputy Commissioner, Yamunanagar, who found it to be a false complaint, and forward it to the S.P, who by his order dated 22.11.95 (Annexure P-2) directed the SHO to proceed under Section 182, IPC. Accordingly, the SHO, PS Sadar Yamunanagar filed a Kalendra under section 182 IPC before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagadhri. The petitioner raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the Kalendra itself on the ground that the Kalendra is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 195(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C which provides as follows:—
“No Court shall take cognizance:—
(a)(i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the IPC (45 of 1860), or;
(ii) of any abetment of, attempt to commit, such offence, or;
(iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence,
except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate.”
2. It is clear from this provision that a complaint against the petitioner should have been lodged either by the Deputy Commissioner or by any officer who is superior to him. On the contrary, Kalendra has been lodged only by the SHO who is not superior to the Deputy Commissioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the decision in Sardari Lal v. State of Punjab, 1992 (2) RCR 13, which clearly supports the contention of the petitioner. Therefore, this petition deserves to be allowed.
4. Accordingly, this petition is allowed, Kalendra-Annexure P-3 and the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Annexure P-4 dated 10.7.96 are quashed.
Petition allowed.
Comments