1. This is an application by the complainant for the revision of the order dismissing the complaint and discharging the accused. The trial Magistrate was of opinion that the execution proceedings would not be judicial proceedings, and that, therefore, the alleged fabrication of false evidence could not fall under the first part of Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also of opinion that the allegations in the complaint did not bring the case under the second part of that section. It was urged on behalf of the accused that the sanction of the Court at Rajapur, which had passed the decree in favour of the complainant, was necessary under Section 195 (b), Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate apparently thought that his view that the execution proceedings were not judicial proceedings was decisive of the complaint, and he expressed no opinion on the question of sanction. He overruled the contention of the complainant that the complaint would be covered by the second part of Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. We are of opinion that the learned Magistrate is wrong in his view that the execution proceedings are not judicial proceedings for the purpose of Sections 192 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code. It is not essential for the purpose of these sections that the judicial proceeding in which the person intends to use the false evidence must be pending at the date of the fabrication. It h clear, therefore, that the complaint cannot be dismissed on the ground that the execution proceedings are not judicial proceedings.
3. It is urged, however, on behalf of the accused and the contention is supported by the Crown, that the sanction of the Court at Rajapur is necessary under Section 195 (b), Criminal Procedure Code. It is difficult to understand why any sanction of that Court under Section 195 is necessary in this case. There was a decree passed by that Court; and payment is said to have been made by the accused outside the Court to the complainant. The complaint is made with reference to certain acts of the accused relating to the alleged payment. There was no execution proceeding actually pending in that Court at the time of the alleged payment. It has been stated before us on behalf of the complainant, and not challenged on behalf of the accused, that no execution proceeding is pending. Nor is it asserted that the judgment-debtor has made any Application to that Court to have this payment certified in accordance with the of the Code of Civil Procedure. Despite the statement in the complaint that a judicial proceeding is pending in the Court at Rajapur, it must be taken for the purpose of the present application, that there was no proceeding pending at the date of the alleged offence before that Court. It is clear, therefore, that no sanction of that Court is necessary. In the absence of any proceeding pending or disposed of, in which or in relation to which the offence under Section 193, Indian Penal Code, is said to have been committed no sanction under Section 195 (6) is necessary. The clause cannot apply to any future judicial proceeding, for which the false evidence may have been fabricated.
4. The question raised on behalf of the complainant as to whether the offence would be covered by the second part of Section 193 does not arise. We, therefore, make the rule absolute, set aside the order of discharge and send back the case to the trial Court in order that the complaint may be dealt with according to law.