High Court

Legal Reasoning

925WP1636-24.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD 925 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1636 OF 2024Anandkumar Saudagar Mirgane,Age: 33 years, Occu: Service,R/o: Bhagwant Colony, Alipur Road,Barshi, Tal. Barshi Dist. Solapur …...PetitionerVersusChaya Shankarrao Kuhire,Age: 61 years, Occu: Retired,R/o: Yashwant nagar, Ambad road,Tal. & Dist. Jalna ...…...Respondent...Ms. Pradnya S. Talekar i/b Talekar And Associates, Advocate forthe PetitionerMr. Mangesh M. Tade, Advocate for the RespondentCORAM: Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.DATE:03.01.2025Oral Judgement :- 1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With theconsent of both the sides, it is heard finally at the stage ofadmission.2.By the present Petition, the Petitioner prayed to quashand set aside the proceeding bearing SCC No.945 of 2024 andorder dated 20.07.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1 of 7 (( 2 ))925WP1636-24First Class, Jalna, thereby issued process against the present Petitionerfor the offence punishable under Sections 199 and 200 of the IndianPenal Code. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the Petitionercanvassed that, the Respondent instituted a Criminal Complaint SCCNo. 945 of 2024 before the J.M.F.C., Jalna, alleging that after death ofher married daughter, namely, Smt. Sneha, the wife of the petitionerin pandemic COVID-19 on 21.08.2021, the Petitioner misused hispowers being a Block Development Officer(BDO) and on the basis offalse and fabricated documents, he tried to get financial benefit andstarted giving trouble to her. On 21.07.2023, the Petitioner/Accusedsubmitted an application for transfer of vehicle with Sub-RegionalTransport Office, Nagewadi and intentionally furnished his falseaddress showing that he is presently residing at Income Tax Colony,Jalna, though he is residing at Barshi, Dist. Solapur and posted inPanchayat Samiti office, Mohol Tq. & Dist. Solapur. The petitioner/accused is giving her trouble due to false and fabricated documents.She submitted an application before the Competent Court seekingpermission to meet her grand-son, namely, Anvik, the son of herdeceased daughter and the petitioner, however, the petitioner made a 2 of 7 (( 3 ))925WP1636-24statement that his son Anvik is studying in junior KG at Mohol Dist.Solapur which is 700 km away from Jalna. Therefore, the Petitioner/accused intentionally prepared false and bogus documents andshowed his address as Income Tax Colony, Jalna. Therefore, thePetitioner/ accused committed offence under Sections 199 and 200 ofthe IPC. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for theRespondent-Complainant canvassed in vehemence that the Petitionerfurnished undertaking with the Regional Transport Office on22.08.2024 and disclosed his address R/o Income Tax Colony,Railway Station Road, Jalna and it is his permanent address. Further,the Petitioner executed affidavit before the Regional Transport office(RTO) Jalna and showed his address R/o Income Tax Colony, Jalnawhile seeking transfer of ownership of vehicle (Maruti Suzuki)bearing No. MH 21 BF 1085. However in the proceeding of custodyof the child, the Petitioner has given his address R/o Mohol Dist.Solapur. Therefore, the Petitioner has committed offence underSections 199 and 200 of the IPC. Accordingly, on 20.07.2024, thelearned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalna passed the impugnedorder and issued process against the Petitioner for the offence 3 of 7 (( 4 ))925WP1636-24punishable u/s 199 and 200 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, theimpugned order is just and proper and it is not amount to abuseprocess of law, hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5.Section 199 of IPC provides that, whoever, in anydeclaration made or subscribed by him, which declaration any Courtof Justice, or any public servant or other person, is bound orauthorized by law to receive as evidence of any fact, makes anystatement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to befalse or does not believe to be true, touching any point material to theobject for which the declaration is made or used, shall be punished inthe same manner as if he gave false evidence. Section 200 of IPC provides that, whoever corruptly uses orattempts to use as true any such declaration, knowing the same to befalse in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as ifhe gave false evidence. 6.In the case of Chandrapal Singh AIR 1982 Criminal LJ1731 equivalent AIR 1982 SC 1238, it has been held that, thecomplaint for an offence under Section 199 of IPC must make out theoffence by signing out false averment in the complaint. Thus wherethe allegation was that the accused had used a false affidavit before 4 of 7 (( 5 ))925WP1636-24the Rent Controller but the complaint did not set out a singleaverment from the said affidavit which is said to be false, it was heldthat the complaint was not maintainable.7. In the case of Jagannath Singh V. State of MadhyaPradesh, 2011 Criminal LJ 3008 (MP), the Madhya Pradesh HighCourt held that the Petitioner has appeared as surety in favour of anaccused person. He had filed his affidavit, bail declaration form andtitle document. It is revealed that, surety was unknown to the accusedof crime. He was not competent for furnishing bail for accused. It wasfurther revealed that Petitioner filed false declaration as well as falseaffidavit in support of the said declaration under these circumstances,it has been held that there is no illegality in framing the charge underSection 199 of IPC.8. In the case of Anil Kapoor Vs. Finance-cum-HealthSecretary, Chandigarh, 1974 Cr LJ 862 (P&H), it has been held thatwhere a candidate appended a false affidavit to his application to theDirector of Health Services seeking admission to M.B.B.S. Courseagainst the reserved quota. Under these circumstances, it has beenheld that, it being not a declaration which any Court or public servantor other person was bound or authorised by law to receive as 5 of 7 (( 6 ))925WP1636-24evidence of a fact, the accused could not be held guilty under Section199/200 of IPC. 9.Similarly, in the case in hand, the present Petitionerappears to be executed the affidavit before the Sub-RegionalTransport Office, Jalna showing his current address R/o BhagwantColony, Barshi Tq. Barshi Dist. Solapur and temporary address R/oIncome Tax Colony, Jalna. The Petitioner furnished his address asIncome Tax Colony Railway Station Road, Jalna while furnishedundertaking with the Transport Authority for transfer of the vehicle.The Sub-Regional Transport Office, Jalna is not the authority underthe law to receive any evidence. Moreover, the said address appearsto be given for the sake of convenience and future correspondence.The Petitioner has given his address as Bhagwant Colony, Barshi, Tq.Barshi, Dist. Solapur. The petitioner is working as a BlockDevelopment Officer with Panchayat Samiti, Mohol Tq. & Dist.Solapur and residing at Barshi, Dist. Solapur. Therefore, to my view,no offence is constituted u/s 199, 200 of IPC as alleged by theRespondent/ complainant. So also, the allegations made in thecomplaint are not sufficient to issue process as against the presentPetitioner. The impugned order of issuance of process by the learned 6 of 7 (( 7 ))925WP1636-24Judicial Magistrate for the offence under Section 199 and 200 of IPCwhich is wholly unjustifiable, groundless as well as withoutconsidering the scope of Section 199 and 200 of IPC and continuingthe prosecution against the petitioner is certainly abuse of process oflaw. Therefore, the complaint beaing SCC No.945 of 2024 is liable tobe quashed and set aside. Resultantly, the order of issuance of processpassed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalna on20.07.2024 is hereby quashed and set aside. Accordingly, Rule ismade absolute in above terms. [ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ] HRJadhav 7 of 7