LexDAULAT RAM versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
ZfU Ktiltlr ~.,~ s;.1~ v. llwl of Billar sw..c. J. 11/Gt Jnuary 16. 812 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1962) SUPP. therefore, that cl. (2) of Art. I 9 olearly eaves thA section from the vice of unconstitutionality. It has not be~n contended hefore us on behalf of the appellant in C.A. 169 of 1957 or on behalf of the respondents in tho other appeals (No. 124·126 of 1958) that the words used by them did not come within the purview of the definition of sedition as interpreted by us. No arguments were advanced before us to show that even on the interpreta.tiop given by us their cases did not come within tho mischit>f of the one or the other section, as the CiUlll may be. It follows, therefore, that the Criminal Appeal Hi!J of 195i has to be dismissed. Criminal Appeals 124-126 of 1958 will be remanded to the High Court to pa.ss such order as it thinks fit awl proper in the light of the interpretation given by us. Appeal No. 169 of 1957 dismissed. Appeal~ Nos. 124 lo 126 of 19ii8 all,owed. DAULATRAM v. STATE OP PUNJAB (J. L. KAPUR, 111. HIDAYATULLAH and RAGllUDAR DAYAL, JJ.) Pro-~ecution-Cognizance-Comp!aint in writing liy thf Public Sen'<lnt concerned-If incumbent--Indian l'enal CO<k, 1860 (Act XLV of 1860), s. 182-Code or Criminal Proc.dure, 11!.?8 (Act F of 1898), •· 11/5. The appellant a Patwari WTote a letter to the Tehsildar under whom he was working that he had been robbed of certain official papers and money. The police reported that on invcstigationt the allegations were found to be falst":. The Tchsi1dar asked the police that a "calendar" be drawn up. The police launched a prosecution under s. 182 of the Indian Penal Code. No complaint in writing as required by 1. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedu1 e was made by the Tchsildar 2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 813 as the pubHc servant concerned in the case, but a charge ~heet was put in bv the police attaching the letter of the Tehs1ldar asking them 'to draw up a "calendar" against the appellant. Held, that in a prosecution to be launched under s. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is incumbent that a complaint in writing should be made by the public servant concerned for only on such complaint can the court take cogniz"ncc of the offence otherwise the trial is without juris- diction ab initio. Held, further, that s. 182 does not require that an action must always be taken on the report made to the public servant, the offence is complete as soon as the report is made and the person who made the report believed that some action would be taken. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1960. Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated November 23, 1959, of the Punjab High Court in Criminal Revision No. 1445of1959. V. D. Mahajan, for the appellant. H. K. Khanna, D. Gupta and P. D. Menon, for the respondent. 1962. January 25. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 196S Daulat Rt1trr •• Stai. of Punjab HIDAYATULLAH, J.-This is an appeal by Bidayalullah J, one l>ault Ram who was prosecuted under s. 182 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to impri- sonment for three months. His revision applica- tion in the High Court of Punjab a.t Chandigarh was dismissed in limini; but he obtained special le:ive from this court and has filed this appeal. The appellant was working as a Patwari and on August 19, 1958, he wrote a letter to the Tehsildar of Pathankot that on the previous day he had been set upon by two persons Hans Raj and Kans .Haj who beat him severely and robbed him of oertai.n of his official papers and some money, which was with him, partly belonging to J3dl D...UI Ram v. SIW of l'unjoi Hi'9<1ullali J. 814 SUPREME COURT REl>ORTS [1962] SUPP. hi~ and partly to the Government. At the end of the letter whirh he wrote to the Tehsildar, he stated that the lct.tc-r was written for his informa- tion. The TehRildar, however, forwarded the letter to the i3ub-Divisional Offiet·r v. ho in his turn sent it on to the police. The police enquired into the facts and reported that the allegations in letter were false. :Meanwhile, it appears that th~ appellant entered into some sort of compromise with Hans Raj and Kans Raj and wrote another letter saying_ that as they were his relatives and he had found the papers and mc,ney, the proceedings if any be dropp- ed and the papers be consigned to the record room. The matter however was pursued fu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.