A Magistrate cannot convict an accused for an offence other than the one for which a complaint was made by a Court under Section 476, CrPC.

1. The accused has been convicted by the Additional District Magistrate, Bhind, under S. 193, I.P.C., for intentionally giving false evidence and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 100. His appeal against his conviction and sentence having been disallowed by the Sessions Judge, the accused has now filed this revision.

2. The charge against the accused is that in Criminal Case No. 304 of 1952, before the Committing Court, Gohad, as a prosecution witness he made a certain statement on 25-3-1953, and, that later on in the same case during the trial before the Sessions Court (Case No. 13 of 1953), Bhind, on 27-7-1953. he made a different statement altogether. Charges under Sections 193 and 194, I.P.C., were framed against the accused. While he was acquitted of an offence under S. 194, I.P.C., he was convicted under S. 193, I.P.C. only.

3. From the record it appears that the Sessions Judge, Bhind, made a complaint against the applicant under S. 476, Criminal P.C. and sent the applicant to the Additional District Magistrate for his being tried for an offence under S. 194, I.P.C. only. The Additional District Magistrate framed two charges against the petitioner.

One, under S. 104 I.P.C. for which the complaint had been made by the Sessions Judge and the other, under S. 193, I.P.C., for which no complaint was made. He acquitted the applicant under S 194, I.P.C., but convicted him under S. 193, I.P.C.

In this revision the contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the accused having been acquitted under S. 194, I.P.C., an offence for which the complaint was made by the Sessions Judge, the Magistrate was incompetent to convict the accused under S. 193, I.P.C., for which there was no complaint by the Sessions Judge at all.

The learned Government Advocate has argued that it does not matter under what section the complaint is made, the trial Court can convict a person under a different section if the facts of the case establish his guilt.

4. The general rule is that any person can set the law in motion by a complaint to a Magistrate. One of the exceptions to this general rule is that in cases where an offence under S. 195, Sub-S. (1), Cl. (b) or Cl. (c) appears to have been committed in the course of proceedings before any civil, revenue or criminal Court, that Court after an enquiry or otherwise will record a finding to that effect and shall forward a complaint to a Magistrate of first class to try the case.

But it is not in every case that a civil, revenue or criminal Court would do this. The Court is further required to satisfy itself whether it is expedient in the interest of justice to launch a prosecution. Such is the direction contained in S. 476, Criminal P.C., under which the complaint was made in this case.

Section 195, Criminal P.C. further directs that no Court shall take cognisance of any offence enumerated in it except on the complaint in writing of some Court.

This being the law on the subject, the question which arises is whether in a case where a complaint of a Court is made under S. 476, Criminal P.C. for one offence, can the Magistrate to whom the case is sent for trial convict the accused for another ?

5. After giving the matter the thought that it deserves, I am of the opinion that the complaint made by a Court to the Magistrate under S. 476, Criminal P.C., is not an ordinary complaint but is a special one.

It is not a report which is made straightway as soon as an offence is committed, which is the usual practice observed in criminal cases, but before doing so the Court is under an obligation to decide whether or not it will be in the interest of justice to do so.

If it decides that it will not be in the interest of justice, then although an offence is committed, no complaint shall be made. Now it follows from this that if the Court made a complaint for a particular offence, the Court considered the expediency of making a complaint under that section.

The Court ob