Sunday, Apr 28, 2024

24x7 Free Helpline For Men +91-888-2-498-498

Court Name : Madras High Court

Karthick vs The Commissioner Of Police on 8 July, 2013

Bench: Mr.Justice R.SUBBIAH

About/from the judgment:

11. Therefore, a reading of the said paragraphs would clearly show that section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C.will not operate as a bar to entertain the complaint by the police where forgery of the document was committed even before the said document was produced in the Court. In the instant case, it is the specific allegation of the complainant that the document was fabricated outside the Court and marked during the course of proceedings. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the respondents are having jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. In view of the above reasons, the second respondent is directed to consider the complaint and if the allegations contained in the complaint discloses the commission of any cognizable offence, the second respondent is directed to register the case, investigate the same and proceed further in accordance with law. Criminal Original petition is disposed of accordingly.