( 1 ) THESE two petitions under section 561-A Criminal Procedure Code have been referred to the Division Bench mainly to consider the question whether the previous decision between the parties in C. W. 189-D/1965 acts as res judicata barring the petitioner from raising in these petitions those contentions which have been aiready decided against him in the writ petition.

( 2 ) THE facts are not in dispute. The petitioner Sharma in his return under the Income-Tax Act 1922 for the assessment year 1959- 60 claimed deduction for the payment of a sum of Rs. 18,000. 00 allegediy made to M/s. Modem Sanitation for electrical and sanitary supervising charges during the relevant year. On enquiry, the lncome-Tax Officer was of the view that the alleged payee did not exist at ail and no such payment had been made by the petitioner. Not only the petitioner s daim to the deduction was disallowed in the assessment but two further proceedings were taken against the petitioner under the Income-Tax Act 1961, which had in the meanwhile corne into force. Firstly, a penalty was imposed on the petitioner for having made a false rctum under section 274 read with sections 271 and 273 of