Appellant Sajjan Singh stands convicted for offence punishable under sections 182 and 201 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court with fine of Rs. 3,000.00 in default whereof to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months by the impugned judgment and order dated 6.11.2000 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Ashta, in Sessions Trial No. 91/2000.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Gajraj Singh, brother of the appellant, was tried for committing the murder of his brother Kumar Singh in Sessions Trial No. 153/92 before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sehore. In that case first information report (Ex. P-3) was lodged by appellant at police station Siddique Ganj. On the basis of the report, a crime was registered at police station Siddique Ganj against Gajraj Singh. Challan was filed and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. During the trial statements of witnesses were recorded. The trial Court after conclusion of the trial, while acquitting Gajraj in S.T. No. 153/92, found that appellant has made a false report to the police station Siddique ganj, and therefore, he should be prosecuted for the offence punishable under sections 182 and 211 of the IPC.

The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, who disposed of S.T. No. 153/92 filed a written complaint (Ex. P-1) before the Magistrate at Sehore. The complaint case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge framed charges under section 211 and 182 of the IPC against the appellant and by the impugned judgment and order convicted and sentenced him as indicated above.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of his conviction and sentence, the appellant has filed this appeal.

I have heard Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ku. Alka Pandya, learned Govt. Advocate for the State and gone through the record of the case.

Ramesh Mishra (PW 1) Reader in the Court of Shri Satish Chandra Dubey, Addl. Sessions Judge, Sehore who filed the aforesaid complaint has stated that complaint (Ex. P-l) was filed by Shri Satish Chandra Dubey, Addl. Sessions Judge, Sehore. The appellant admitted before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge that Ex. P-2 is the copy of the statement made by him in Sessions Trial No. 153/92. He also admitted that Ex. P-3 is the copy of the FIR lodged by him. In his statement recorded under section 313 CrPC appellant did not dispute that Ex. P-2 is the copy of the report made by him. He has further admitted that he made statement vide Ex. P-4 in the sessions trial.

From the statement recorded as per Ex. P-4 it is clear that appellant admitted in his statement before the Addl. Sessions Judge in S.T. No. 153/92 that said report bears his signature. During the trial appellant admitted that Gajraj Singh did not assault Kumar Singh. Gajraj Singh did not confess before him that he killed Kumar Singh. Thus, from his statement it is clear that he had no knowledge regarding the incident still he lodged a FIR at police station Siddque Ganj. Thus, he caused to be instituted a criminal proceeding against Gajraj Singh and falsely charged Gajraj Singh for having committed an offence of murder. He admitted that the incident did not take place in his presence. Thus, he was knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for alleged charge against Gajraj Singh, therefore, learned Addl. Sessions Judge has committed no error in convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under section 211 IPC.

The act of the appellant is .covered by section 182 IPC as well as he lodged false report with intend to cause S.H.O. Siddique Ganj, to use his lawful power to the injury of Gajraj. A case may fall under both sections 182 and 211 IPC, as where a person gives false information to a public servant which he knows to be false and such information amounts to a false charge against a particular person with knowledge that there is no just or lawful ground for it but in s