The court has discretion under Section 340 CrPC to initiate proceedings, requiring a substantiated showing of expediency in the interest of justice; mere allegations without evidence of harm do not suffice.

JUDGMENT :

G. Satapathy, J.

1. These are two IAs by the informant-Prajna Prakash Nayak in Airfield FIR No. 265 of 2021, which was subsequently renumbered as EOW P.S. Case No. 12 of 2023 with prayers for initiation of proceeding U/S. 340 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in IA No. 1588 of 2024 against the petitioner-Rajeev Lochan Das and the deponent of BLAPL No. 3078 of 2024 namely Sonia Tripathy; and IA No. 80 of 2025 against the petitioner- Rajeev Lochan Das, deponent-Mr. Maonj Kumar Mohanty(Advocate Clerk), advocate concerned-Ms. Ayushi Mehta and the corporator-Ms. Monalisa Behera who had issued a death certificate for the petitioner in I.A. No. 53 of 2025.

2. Heard Mr. Sumit Sekhar Pattnayak, learned counsel for the petitioner-Rajeev Lochan Das; Mr. Santanu Kumar Behera, learned counsel for the deponent-Sonia Tripathy; Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP and Mr. Santanu Kumar Sarangi, learned Senior Counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. Balaram Nayak, learned counsel for the informant in the matter and perused the record.

3. On a careful scrutiny of the averments of the IA No. 1588 of 2024 and I.A. No. 80 of 2025, it appears to the Court that the informant namely Prajna Prakash Nayak has alleged against the petitioner and deponent in I.A. No. 1588 of 2024 that they have furnished false address of the petitioner in the bail application to secure relief for them and the informant has also alleged against the petitioner, deponent, conducting advocate and corporator in I.A. No. 80 of 2025 for furnishing false death certificate to secure interim bail for the petitioner in I.A. No. 53 of 2025. It is further found from the record that the informant has alleged against the petitioner for making false averments in Paragraphs-7, 8, 10 & 12 of the bail application. Primarily it appears to the Court that the informant wants to proceed against the aforesaid persons U/S.340 of CrPC for furnishing false address and incorrect death certificate. Be that as it may, Mr. Santanu Kumar Sarangi, learned Senior Counsel for the informant has conceded against the deponent, advocate and the corporator in I.A. No. 80 of 2025 and leave it to the Court not to take any action against them for assisting the persons in furnishing false address in the affidavit. However, Mr. Sarangi sternly presses this Court to take serious action against the petitioner-Rajeev Lochan Das, his wife-Sonia Tripathy in I.A. No. 1588 of 2024 and against the petitioner- Rajeev Lochan Das in I.A. No. 80 of 2025 for furnishing false address and incorrect death certificate.

4. This Court before dwelling upon the issue on merit considers it proper to reiterate the language of Sec.340 of CrPC which reads as under:-

“Sec.340(1)- When, upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary;

(a) record a finding to that effect;

(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;

(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction;

(d) take sufficient security for the appearance for the accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non-bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and (e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate.” xx xx xx xx xx xx xx.

A careful