Crpc

Except 420 being not specified in Sec195 CrPc. You can file said application, its best tool in the hands of accused who is prosecuted on basis of false claim and with false proceedings. 

thanks for reply. in cheque , the complainant has made entry and in cross , he denied so.

therefore, through 195 crpc , i wish to pray the writing on chq presented in trial.may be ordered for enquiry.

may u pl quote any such case ,in which complainant used forged documents.

Perjury cases are rarely filed since judge has to file complaint and he / she may be called for cross.

People read books and suggest it but no where in practice any action on such applications have been taken.

You have to wait for disposal of the ensuing case and then decide about the intended perjury case based on the facts discussed in the judgment of the ensuing cheque bounce case.

In your case, the stage is not ripe yet, first you bring on record evidence in your defense that it was his handwriting, then any day you can go ahead with application under S.340 CrPC, otherwise chances of your application getting dismissed are very high.

1. Application under S.340 CrPC, can be moved, if it appears from affidavit and cross that deponent lied. Like in your case, if deponent had stated in the affidavit that cheque was not filled up by him or he received fully filled up cheque, but in the cross if you could elicit that the cheque was filled up by him. Fit case for perjury in alternative.

2. Any material statement made on oath (affidavit or cross), if you could provide evidence preferrably after cross, that the said statement was false, application under S.340 CrPC can be moved.

3. Magistrate is required to just instruct to court to initiate the complaint, or even he can forward the application to CJM with his enquiry order for taking the complaint and necessary further orders.

4. Magistrate is not required to be present as complainant, it is state Vs Deponent cases, and the court is the complainant in real sense, not the magistrate.

5. Magistrate is not called as witness as a matter of fact, if the point is clear from the record. infact accused does not have the right to call or summon the magistrate, without bonafide reasons. The court acts as a complainant but proof and evidence are substantiated by the applicant even during trial, this applicant can move further applications to establish the case fully during trial.

6. The kind of lies coming forward in S.138, S.376, S.498A ; Next wave is perjury only !! The stage has come when the affidavit has become a total farce.

Please give case details or any case law where such cases u/s 340 are filed and the concerned Judge has not to appear while trial.

shri trivedi ji

       thanks for reply. the complainant has stated in cross--i do not know --which person has filled the cheque.while the writing has only and only from him.for huge money lent , he has no single paper of proof.he says -he does not know the income tax law and its application.