Macpherson and Banerjee, JJ.
1. We can only quash this commitment on a point of law. The petitioner has been committed by a Munsif to the Sessions Court at Chittagong on charges under Sections 467 and 471, as well as other sections of the Penal Code. It is contended that, under Section 478 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Munsif had no jurisdiction to make the commitment, because the offence charged, though referred to in Section 195 of the Code, was not an offence described in Clause (c) of that section. The words 'any such offence' in Section 478 mean an offence referred to in Section 195 and not fin the case of the offences mentioned in Clause (c), Section 195) an offence referred to in that section qualified by the circumstances under which it is committed, i. e., committed by a party to any proceeding in any Court in respect of a document given in evidence in such proceeding, as described in Clause (c) of the section. We have no doubt that the former is the right construction, and that the offences referred to in Section 478 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are the offences mentioned in Section 195. If the latter construction is correct it is difficult to give any meaning to the words in Section 478, * * 'or brought under the notice of any Civil or Criminal Court in the course of a judicial proceeding.'
2. It appears that in the present case the document, which has been made the subject of the charge, was filed in a civil suit pending before the Munsif, and was intended to be used as evidence in that suit, although it may not have been actually put in evidence, and the offence which is said to have been committed in respect of it was brought under his notice in the course of a judicial proceeding. We think, therefore, that there is no point of law on which we can quash the commitment. The application must, therefore, be rejected.