Ram NaraIn Vs. State - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
criminal - public servant - section 195(a) of criminal procedure code, 1898 - complaint of pick pocketing lodged with one station officer - officer forwarded it to railway police officer as crime committed in train - the railway police officer found complaint false and filed complaint against complainant - held, station officer of the station where offence was lodged is the public servant in relation to things happened and complaint by police officer is without authority. - - this view is perfectly correct and is fullysupported by the words of the section itself.orderkidwai, j.1. on the 18th of august 1948, ram narain lodged a report at police station beniganj to the effect that his pocket had been picked by one ram bharosey at the railway station at beniganjand that the pick pocket had attempted to escape but was caught. it was further state that the guard of the train banded over the man caught to the station master but, because of the latter's hostility to ram narain, the accused was not searched but was allowed to go. the station officer of beniganj forwarded the report to the station officer g.r.p. hardoi for investigationsince the offence had occurred on the railway.the station officer g.r.p. hardoi came to the conclusion that a false report had been filed by ram narain since his pocket had not been picked.he accordingly filed a complaint under section 182, penal code against ram narain. ram narain was convinced and sentenced to pay a fine of rs. 40. he applied in revision to the sessions judge of hardoi,who has referred the case with the recommendationthat the conviction be set aside. 2. accordingly to the view taken by the sessions judge it was the station officer of beniganj who should have made a complaint in writingunder the provisions of section 195 clause (a), criminal p.c. this view is perfectly correct and is fullysupported by the words of the section itself. the report was made to the station officer, beniganjand the written information was supplied to him.he was the public servant concerned and it wasfor him to make the complaint. the station officer,g.r.p. hardoi had, therefore, no authority to file the complaint. i accordingly accept the reference, set aside the conviction of ram narain and direct that the fine, if paid, shall be refunded.

Judgment:
ORDER

Kidwai, J.

1. On the 18th of August 1948, Ram Narain lodged a report at police station Beniganj to the effect that his pocket had been picked by one Ram Bharosey at the railway station at Beniganjand that the pick pocket had attempted to escape but was caught. It was further state that the guard of the train banded over the man caught to the station master but, because of the latter's hostility to Ram Narain, the accused was not searched but was allowed to go. The Station officer of Beniganj forwarded the report to the Station Officer G.R.P. Hardoi for investigationsince the offence had occurred on the railway.The station officer G.R.P. Hardoi came to the conclusion that a false report had been filed by Ram Narain since his pocket had not been picked.He accordingly filed a complaint under Section 182, penal Code against Ram Narain. Ram Narain was convinced and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 40. He applied in revision to the Sessions Judge of Hardoi,who has referred the case with the recommendationthat the conviction be set aside.

2. Accordingly to the view taken by the sessions Judge it was the Station Officer of Beniganj who should have made a complaint in writingunder the provisions of section 195 Clause (a), Criminal P.C. This view is perfectly correct and is fullysupported by the words of the section itself. The report was made to the station Officer, Beniganjand the written information was supplied to him.He was the public servant concerned and it wasfor him to make the complaint. The Station Officer,G.R.P. Hardoi had, therefore, no authority to file the complaint. I accordingly accept the reference, set aside the conviction of Ram Narain and direct that the fine, if paid, shall be refunded.