The requirement of recording a finding that it is expedient in the interests of justice that a complaint be filed under Section 476 CrPC is mandatory and any failure to comply with that requirement deserves the order to be set aside.

( 1 ) THE complaint filed on 2/02/1965 by the appellant before the Police against Gotur Palreddi and eight others for the offences under Sections 457, 380, 395 and 395 read with 397 I. P. C. was referred as false. Thereupon, a private complaint preferred by her on 1-7-65 before the J. S. C. . M. , Cuddapah was, after committal tried by the Assistant Sessions judge, Cuddapah in S. C. 5/65 who, by his judgment dated 28/10/1967 acquitted the accused of all the charges leveled against them holding that there was neither truth nor substance in the complaint. On 19-1-1968, the Assistant Sessions Judge filed a complaint before the judicial First Class Magistrate, Cuddapah against the appellant alleging that she had maliciously instituted criminal proceedings against gotur Palreddi and eight others on the false charge of commission of the offence of dacotiy with intent to cause injury to them, knowing that there was no just or lawful ground for such charge or proceeding in his Court, and has thereby committed an offence punishable under the 2nd part of Section 211 I. P. C. hence this appeal.

( 2 ) THE failure on the part of the Assistant Sessions Judge, contended by Sri k Padmanabha Reddy for the Appellant, to give a finding a s contemplated by Section 476 Criminal P. C. about the expediency in the interests of justice to inquire into the offence under Section 211 I. P. C. alleged to have been committed by his client in the course of trial in S. C. No. 5 of 1965, warrants the quashing of the complaint.

( 3 ) THE learned Public Prosecutor contended contra and urged that Section 476 Criminal P. C. does not contemplate the Court to give any such specific finding in every case.

( 4 ) THE point that arises for determination is whether on the facts and in the circumstances, the Assistant Sessions judge has or has not preferred the complaint according to law as contemplated by the provisions of Section 476 Criminal P. C. ?

( 5 ) FOR a proper appeciation of the point at issue, it is profitable to consider Sec. 476 C. Criminal P. C. which reads thus: "when any. . Criminal Court is. . . . of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice that an enquiry should be made into any offence referred to in Section 195 sub-section (1), clause (a) or clause (b) which appears to have been committed in or relation to a proceeding in that Court, such Court may after such preliminary enquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary, record a finding to that effect and make a complaint thereof in writing signed by the presiding officer of the Court, and shall forward the same to a magistrate of the First Class having jurisdiction. . . . Section 476 Criminal P. C. prescribes an exhaustive procedure relating to the preferring of complaints by Courts, civil, criminal or revenue, in respect of offences mentioned in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-sec (1) to Section 195. This section enjoins the Court, before which the offence under Section 211, I. P. C. appears to have been committed in or in relation to any proceeding before, it, to be satisfied objectively in each case that it was expedient in the interests of justice that an enquiry should be held into the offence. Thereafter the Court may have such preliminary enquiry as it thinks necessary and record a finding to the effect that it is expedient in the interests of justice or that it is a fit case to prosecute the person or persons who committed the offence and then make a complaint in writing and forward the same to the First Class Magistrate for disposal according to law. The words "such Court may after such preliminary enquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary, record a finding to that effect" must necessarily be construed that it is incumbent on the Court to record a finding to the effect that it is expedient in the interest of justice to enquire into the offence referred to in Section 195 (1) clause (b) or (c) although the preliminary enquriy may or may not be held in the discretion of the Court