ORDER

1. This order seeks to dispose of appeal filed under section 341 of CrPC by appellant Ankur Siroutiya, which has been preferred against the order dated 13.3.2020 passed in MJCR No.411/2019 by the Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Ujjain, rejecting the application filed under section 340 of CrPC.

2. As per facts stated the respondent Smt. Ruchi had filed Misc. Criminal Case No.125 of CrPC against appellant Ankur before the Family Court at Ujjain. Vide order dated 19.9.2018, the aforesaid application was rejected. The appellant thereafter filed an application under section 340 of CrPC read with section 195 of CrPC alleging that respondent has given false evidence in the aforesaid case and provisions of sections 191, 193, 199, 200 and 209 of IPC are attracted and an application under section 340 of CrPC was filed in which it was prayed that the JMFC should lodge a written complaint against the respondent. However, this application under section 340 of CrPC was rejected on 13.3.2020.

3. The appellant submits that the respondent had categorically stated that she has not done any job after completing her M.Sc. and had denied that she was working in Bharti Gyan Peeth, but appellant produced the relevant document Exhibit A/4, showing the respondent to be working as lecturer in Bharti Gyan Peeth. The appellant had also furnished a pass book of respondent showing crediting salary in her account due to her job as lecturer; that the respondent had also worked as Lab. Assistant and document to that effect was also filed; that the appellant submits that such false evidence was given by respondent only to obtain maintenance from the appellant. The appellant submits that although the maintenance application was rejected but respondent filed a revision application but held back the new development which was that respondent had been selected to the post of Patwari. The appellant submits that the application for maintenance was filed by the respondent malafidely in order to harass the appellant and due to interim order passed, the appellant suffered a loss of Rs.45,000/- because he was required to pay Rs.2500/- per month to respondent for a period of 18 months. Thus, it is prayed that appeal be allowed and that the competent Court, ie., Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Ujjain be directed to lodge a written compliant against the respondent; that the respondent be directed to return Rs.45,000/- received by her fraudulently from the appellant and the cost of Rs.5,000/- be also directed to be paid to the appellant.

4. The respondent has not submitted her written reply but has orally stated that the applicant has filed this application only to harass her. He further submits that the documents on which the appellant relied have not been exhibited in evidence and that the ingredients of section 195A and section 195B are missing. He has further referred to the citations of apex Court quoted by the Family Court in para 7 of the impugned order dated 13.3.2020.

5. The question before this Court is whether in view of the submissions made by the appellant that this appeal filed under section 341 of Cr.P.C deserves to be allowed or not.

6. Appellant Ankur has drawn Court's attention to the various documents placed on record. He has referred to the order passed under section 125 of CrPC dated 19.9.2018 wherein in para 13, the Court has mentioned respondent Ruchi has stated in her examination in chief that she has done M.Sc in Computer Science and presently pursuing further studies and that she has no source of income. The evidence of Ruchi has been pointed out by Ankur and this evidence is placed at Page No.62 of the compilation in which she has stated that she has undertaken no job anywhere. Further reference has been made to a document placed at Page No.72 which is a document describing the faculty of Bhartiya Institute of Professional Studies. In this document, it has been shown that Ruchi is appointed as lecturer and having experience of six m