for having interpolated in the order sheet

In Govind Mehta Vs. The State of Bihar AIR 1971 SC 1708 it is ruled as under; “Criminal P.C. (5 of 1898), S.195- I.P.C. 167, 465, 466, 471 - A first class Magistrate was alleged to have made some interpolation in the order sheet of a case in after sanction under section 197 by the state Govt. a complaint was filed in a competent court of Magistrate against the said first class Magistrate. Action is legal The jurisdiction of the court, under S. 190, to take cognisance of a complaint, filed by the Public Prosecutor against a magistrate under S. 197, for offences under Ss. 167, 465, 466 and 471. Penal Code, for having interpolated in the order sheet, after an application for transfer of a case has been made, certain orders, containing the remark that the District magistrate was interfering with the proceeding in the case before him. in order to make it appear that they had been passed much earlier, and sending the order sheet as the true report in the case to the court dealing 80 with the transfer application, is not barred by S. 195 or S. 476 of the Code. (Para 18) The offences under Ss. 167 and 466 are not covered by S. 194 (1) (b) or (c) and therefore the power of the Court to take cognisance of the offences is not barred on the ground of absence of a complaint against the accused by the court to which he was subordinate. (Para 15) Even as regards the offence under S. 471, Penal Code the jurisdiction of the magistrate to take cognisance is not barred by S. 195 (1) (c) as although that offence is taken in by that section its essential requirement that the offence should have been committed by a party to any proceeding in court is not satisfied. The accused had no personal interest in the transfer applications and the mere fact that certain allegations had been made against the accused in the transfer application would not make him party to the proceeding before the court dealing with that application. (Para 17) Section 476 of the Code also would not apply to the case in view of the fact that cls (b) and (c) of S.195 (1) do not apply. The fact that an application was also made by the complainant for filing a complaint under Sections 471 and 467, Penal Code would not attract the application of the section when the court gave its finding that the accused had committed forgery and interpolation in the order sheets only for the purpose of 81 transferring the case and merely sent its order to the Government for taking action against the accused if it desired. (Para 18) It is true that S. 465, Penal Code was mentioned in the complaint and since it deals with punishment for offence under S. 463, Penal Code which is taken in by Cl. (c) of S. 195 (1) of the Code, it may also be said to be covered by that clause. Even then that clause cannot operate in the case because the offence cannot be said to have been committed by the accused "as a party to any proceeding " in a court . (Para 19)