Procedure to be followed in 340 crpc
Raman
(Querist) 30 May 2015
This query is : Resolved
Sir I i have filed two 340 crpc applications in different Metropolitain courts of the same District
In both 340 crpc complaints the Opposite party has filed their replies
In one metroploitian court the, Ld M.M has fixed for the arguments for the mainatainability of the 340 crpc applcaition
In another Metropolitian court, the Ld MM has passed an order for the evidences of the accused complainant
My question is since 340 crpc application , the magaistrate has to follow the summary procedure, then why second magsitrate has asked for the evidences of the accused complainant?
How can accused complainant leads an evidences which if lead could self incriminate in further proceedings?
The 340 crpc is meant for punishing the person for tendering false evidences, if the accused complainant has shown the suffiencet proof whether such sufficent proof is not enough for summary trail?
whether accused complainant has to be examined by chief in examination as well has to face the cross examination by the opposite party lawyer?
kindly help in this regard
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 30 May 2015
CrPC 340: Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Procedure in cases mentioned in section 195
When upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary,-
record a finding to that effect;
make a complaint thereof in writing;
send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction;
take sufficient security for the appearance for the accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non-bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and
bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate.
The power conferred on a Court by Sub-Section (1) in respect of an offence may, in any case where that Court has neither made a complaint under Sub-Section (1) in respect of that offence nor rejected an application for the making of such complaint, be exercised by the Court to which such former Court is subordinate within the meaning of Sub-Section (4) of section 195.
A complaint made under this section shall be signed,-
where the Court making the complaint is a High Court, by such officer of the Court as the Court may appoint;
in any other case, by the presiding officer of the Court or by such officer of the Court as the Court may authorise in writing in this behalf.
In this section, “Court” has the same meaning as in section 195.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 31 May 2015
Well, the 2d Magistrate seems to have taken wrong procedure.
In 340 petitions the concerned is to get prima facie satisfied with the allegations and if on bare perusal of the petition it appears that perjury has occurred then he send the matter to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to take cognizance of the case.
The court where the 340 petition is filed is to inquire the matter on its own and in this process there is no place of leading evidence.
P. Venu
(Expert) 31 May 2015
The crux if the issue is that 340CrPC is the least used provision of the Criminal procedure. Had it not been so, our courts would not faced insurmountable docket explosion, esp. the avalanche in NI 138 cases.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 01 June 2015
Well advised by experts, no room left to add, I fully agree with them.
Did you file certified copy of the affidavit/ document which has been relied upon by the non-applicant before the 2nd MM. to look into it and without directing you to prove your version so that cognizance may be taken against the person falsifying before that court?
Prima facie the MM is unsatisfied (found insufficient material/evidence) with the documents annexed by you for taking cognizance of the offence committed by non-applicant.
Raman
(Querist) 06 June 2015
second magistrate has made the order
"Reply to 340 crpc complaint filed, Copy supplied and now come for evidence of the complainant"
No we have not filed the certify copies of the documents but annexed the photocpy of the documents
Since we have received the typed copies of the documents in supreme court of India..and there is no provsion of filing certify copies there.How can we asked for certify copies of docuemnts??
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 09 June 2015
You can very well apply for certified photo copies of the documents held by that court on which you rely upon to file the present case u/s 340 cr.p.c. The photo copies you have filed is not authentic hence to establish the authenticity the certified copies are to be produced because you rely upon them for taking this case on file.
