Sheopal Singh vs Mahendra Narain Singh and Others

Agarwala, J.—The petitioner obtained a decree in the Court of the Munsif of Gaya setting aside an ex parte rent decree which had been obtained by the opposite party. Six months later the petitioner applied to the Munsif u/s 476, Criminal P.C., for the prosecution of the opposite party u/s 193, I.P.C. The Munsif ordered a complaint to be filed under that section. In appeal that order has been set aside by the District Judge of Gaya. The view of the learned District Judge was that it was not in the interest of justice that the prosecution should proceed. The learned Judge also considered that it was undesirable that a prosecution u/s 476, Criminal P.C., should be initiated after a long lapse of time, and applying the decision of Wort, J., in Bhagirath Bhagat Vs. Ram Narain Sahu, t;he learned District Judge was also of opinion that it was undesirable that proceedings u/s 476 should be initiated at the instance of a private party.

The present order withdrawing the complaint, having been made by the learned District Judge, the application in revision against that order is governed by Section 115, Civil P.C: Banwari Lal Vs. Jhunka, . The learned advocate has not attempted to show that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to make the order or that he has acted in excess of his jurisdiction. The rule is therefore discharged.