1. In this case Abul Hasan wont to the Police-station and accused Ser Mai of having stolen certain surgical instruments from the dispensary at Atrauli. This complaint was made with the intention that it should he reported to the Magistrate and that thereon proceedings should he taken against Ser Mai. At the suggestion of Abul Hasan, the Police immediately searched the premises occupied by Ser Mai, and there found, in a place which could be readily reached from the outside of the house, the articles alleged to have been stolen. The Police, finding that Abul Hasan had recently a quarrel with Ser Mai about the non-payment of some fees for medical attendance, and seeing that the articles wore placed in a spot unlikely to have been selected by the owner of the promises, but in which they might have been deposited by any person outside the house without attracting the attention of the inmates, in forwarding a, report to the Magistrate intimated that the charge made was false. The Magistrate, after making a second inquiry through the tahsildar, came to the same conclusion and refrained from instituting any proceedings against Ser Mai. Abul Hasan was, however, summoned to answer the charge of having instituted a false complaint of a criminal offence, and on this charge he was convicted. On appeal, the Judge acquitted him, holding that the charge of false complaint could not be sustained because the Magistrate had not inquired into the charge of theft, and in support of his judgment the Judge relied on the ruling of a Bench of the High Court, Calcutta--The Queen v. Bishoo Barik 16 W.R.Cr. 77. We may point out that in that case proceedings on the original charge were actually pending when the charge of false complaint was instituted and determined, whereas in the case before us no proceeding's were pending on the original charge when proceedings were instituted against Abul Hasan. Whether it would be a sufficient answer to a charge of false complaint that the complaint had not been determined and that proceedings were still pending, we need not now determine, for in this case no proceedings had been instituted. The offence consists not in the prosecution of a false complaint but in the making of it. The case of The Queen v. Subbanna Gaundan 1 Mad. H.C.R. 30 is precisely in point. We concur in the ruling of Chief Justice Scotland in that case and in the grounds on winch that riding proceeds. The ground, therefore, on which the judgment of the Sessions Judge proceeds is bad in law. The evidence adduced by the prosecution satisfies us that the original charge was made and that it was false, and warrants the inference that Abul Hasan knew it was false, and made it with the intention of injuring Her Mal. The conviction was therefore proper, and the sentence is certainly not too severe. The appeal is allowed, the judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge is set aside, and the conviction and sentence affirmed.