Legal Question in Criminal Law in India

Person " A" being petitioner submits a sworn false affidavit against Responent ( B) before judicial authority in a judicial proceedings. The Judicial officer, keeping in view the false affidavit, passed an order , which were later on quashed in an appeal.
Later on Respondent ( B) file an application under sec 340 read with 195 of Cr PC before Judicial authority , being Public Servant , requesting him to take necessary action A , Petitioner since he had submitted before you a sworn false affidavit, thereby misleading you in carrying our judicial functions.
On hearing both the parties , Judicial Officer , decided to take action against A under SEc 181 and 196 of IPC and accordingly file kalandra in the court of magistrate.
Meanwhile, Respondent B alse filed simultaneously a complaint before concerned Police Authorities giving details facts of the case , therein explaning clearly that actually , Petitioner A has played fraud with B ( RESPONDENT) by submitting a false affidavit. Therefore , A has committed two offences one with Public Servant - ( Judicial officer) and second with Respondent B.In view of this , B requested POlice officers to book the A under Sec 420, 465, 468 AND 471 .
Police officers after due investigation on the complaint filed by B submitted a detaled report to senior Police officials , wherein POlice officers also concluded that A with malfide intentions to play fraud with B has submitted false affidavit before Judicial officer. But senior Police officer refused to take action despite clear adverse findings in Police REport.
Since Magistrate has fixed 5 the March as next date of hearing in Kalandra case ( under sec 181 and 196) i.e State v/s A .
Now , Can B file an application with the Magistrate u/sec 210 of Cr PC giving details of POlice Report etc requesting for converting this Kalandra case ( state v/s A) into Police case ? OR is there any other legally valid alternative available to B so as to use Police report for getting A booked under storonger section like Sec 420 etc instead of Sec 181 & 196. Or B is to concentrate on existing Kaladra Case by supporting Public Prosecuter etc.

Asked on 2/23/10, 2:12 am

Sudershan Goel India Law Offices of Sudershan Goel - Advocate

0 users found helpful

0 attorneys agreed

An application u/s 340 Cr P, C, may be maintainable before the same court.

Answered on 2/23/10, 6:36 am

Keywords

Match Any Match All

Country

State

Area of Law