The main legal point established in the judgment is that a complaint made under Section 198-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be signed by the Public Prosecutor and need not be signed by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed.

A. NARAYANA PAI, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition raises an intricate point regarding the interpretation and effect Of section 198-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure introduced for the first time by the amending act XXVI of 1955. There is only one reported decision of a single Judge of the Bombay High court dealing with this Section and that is found reported in C. B. L. Bhatnagar v. The State, AIR1958 Bom 196 , (1957 )59 BOMLR364 , 1958 Crilj617. The observations made in that judgment are relied upon by both sides in support of their respective contentions, although the decision itself does not finally conclude the controversy now before me for decision.

( 2 ) THE undisputed facts may be stated briefly. In the wake of the re-organisation of States in 1956 there were some disturbances in Belgaum in consequence of which orders were issued under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code and also under Section 37 (1) of the Bombay police Act by the District Magistrate of Belgaum. Breaches of these orders were committed or attempted to be committed by certain agitators and some were arrested and remanded to custody. One of them fey name Nagappa Dudappa Hosurkar died in custody. As suspicioas were raised regarding the cause of his death further public commotion was feared. There appears to have been a large number of persons who wanted to take the body out in procession to the cremation ground, whereas the authorities had the body removed in a police van to which course it is stated the relatives of the deceased had agreed. At the cremation ground the body could not be taken out of the van. At that time Sri S. Y. Ranade, I. A. S. the District Magistrate of Belgaum, is said to have proceeded to the spot and is reported to have given certain instructions to the police and made some observations about the behaviour of crowds and their leaders. The District Magistrate is also said to have held a special press meeting to explain the correct position regarding the death of the undertrial prisoner 'sri Hosurkar. With reference to this incident the Respondent Sri Pralhad Keshav Atre, Sanchalak of a weekly newspaper called "navyug," wrote a leading article as "atre Uvacha" captioned "nagappa Hosurker murdered?"

( 3 ) IT is in respect of the above article that the prosecution now in question was launched. The complaint in respect of it is made direct to the Court of Sessions at Belgaum under the provisions of Section 198-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The cause title of the complaint is as follows : "the Public Prosecutor, Belgaum. . . . Complainant v. Pralhad Keshav Atre of Bombay. . . Aicused. Section 500, I. P. C. "

( 4 ) THE complaint begins with the words : "in this, the Public Prosecutor begs to file a complaint as under:--"

( 5 ) IT is signed as follows : "v. A. Mujumdar complainant. (Public Prosecutor)23-10-1956 ). " it is not signed by Sri S. Y. Ranade, the District Magistrate, against whom the offence is allied to have been committed. Sri Mujumdar was not the Public Prosecutor when the offence was committed, hut has been specially engaged by the Government for conduct of the case and for the said purpose appointed Public Prosecutor. The offending article appeared in the issue of the navyug dated 13-5-1956. On 16-7-1956 the Government of Bombay in the Legal Department adopted a resolution No. 15929/c, reading :

"resolution : Sanction is accorded to the engagement of Shri V. A. Mujumdar, Pleader, belgaum as a Special Council in the case to be filed by the District Magistrate, and Collector of baigaum against the Editor of "navayug" for publishing a defamatory article in its issue, dated 13-5-1956 in regard to the death of undertrial prisoner Shri Nagappa Dudappa Hosurkar. "

The remaining portion of the resolution dealing, with the fixation of Sri Majumdar's fee is irrelevant for our purpose. On 24-9-1956 the Government of Bombay in its Home Department (Political)adopted another resolution according sanction under Clause (c) o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document