& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

NARI-O-SHISHU NIRJATAN DAMAN AIN, 2000

Powers of the Tribunal regarding false cases
Background
This appeal under Section 28 of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 is directed against the order dated 17.9.2001 passed in Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Aparad Daman Tribunal Case No. 395 of 2001 under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000, by the learned Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Tribunal, Habiganj directing the Magistrate, Cognizance Court No. 2, Habiganj to file a case under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 against the informant for initiating a false case against the accused persons of the case.
The appellant namely, Md Nurul Haque lodged a petition of complaint on 17.5.2001 in the Court of Magistrate Habiganj against Muktar Mia and Maksud Mia of his village under Sections 9(4) (Kha)/30 of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 and the learned Magistrate sent the petition of complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police Station for treating the same as FIR and accordingly Baniachang PS Case No. 20(5) 2001 corresponding to GR No. 266 of 2001 was started and police, on completion of investigation, submitted final report, under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stating inter alia that the case was the outcome of misunderstanding between the parties. Anwar Ali, husband of victim Hosnabanu, filed a Naraji petition against the final report which came before the learned Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Aparad Daman Bishesh Adalat, Habiganj on 17.9.2001 for hearing. The learned Adalat rejected the Naraji petition as the petitioner was found absent on call and after hearing the pubic prosecutor accepted the final report, discharged the accused persons and upon submission of the public prosecutor the learned Tribunal also directed the Magistrate, Cognizance Court No. 2, Habiganj to file a case under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 against the informant (complainant).
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the informant has preferred the instant appeal. Heard the learned Advocates of both the sides. Perused the record.
Deliberation
Mr Md Raziur Rahman Chowdhury, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants, submits that it is nowhere in the police report that the informant filed a false case and the learned Tribunal also did not arrive at any such finding on assigning any reason that the informant initiated a false criminal prosecution against the accused persons. The learned Advocate further submits that Subsection (2) of Section 17 provides that Tribunal can entertain a case under Section 17(1) only when a complaint to the effect is filed by any person but in the instant case, no petition by anybody was filed before the Tribunal for initiation of the criminal proceeding against the informant and in that view of the matter the order of the learned Tribunal directing the Magistrate to file a case against the informant is illegal and without jurisdiction. The learned Advocate further submits that if it is found on a petition made before the Tribunal that the case or the complaint, as the case may be, was filed by any person against any accused with a view to harm him knowing fully well that there was no reason to file the case or make the complaint, in that case person against whom the false case has been filed, may prosecute or bring accusation under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 against the informant or the complainant or against the person who got such a case filed by any other person and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to direct the Magistrate to file a case under the aforesaid section in this manner. The learned Advocate further submits that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside.
Mr Sk Rezaul Karim, the learned Assistant Attorney General, appearing for the State submits that the appellant has challenged the entire order accepting the final report and directing the Magistrate for filing a case against the informant under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 and as such the appeal may be dismissed or even may be allowed after necessary modification of the impugned order. The learned Assistant Attorney General, however, does not controvert the submissions made by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant to the effect that the Tribunal has committed a mistake in directing the Magistrate to file a case against the informant.
It appears from the record that the appellant has challenged only that portion of the order directing the Magistrate to file a case against the informant under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 and he has not challenged the order accepting final report. Therefore, the submission of the learned Assistant Attorney General in this regard has no merit. It further appears from the record that none has filed any petition for prosecution of the informant for making a false complaint or filing a false case and as such the Tribunal did not act in accordance with law in directing the Magistrate to file a case under Section 17(1) of the aforesaid Ain. Result
The Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 does not empower the Tribunal created under section 26 thereof to take cognizance against any person who has filed a false case or a complaint or got such a case or complaint filed by any other person with a view to causing harm to the person against whom such case or complaint filed in the absence of any written complaint made by any person as provided by Sub-section 2 of the said section and the Tribunal has no authority to direct the Magistrate or any other person to file any such complaint to enable it to take such cognizance.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we find nothing to disagree with the learned Advocate for the appellant that the appeal should be dismissed. There is merit in the appeal.
In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order directing the Magistrate, Habiganj to file a case under Section 17(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 against the appellant, being informant of the case, is hereby set aside. Mr Md. Raziur Rahman Chowdhury, for the appellant. Mr Sk. Rezaul Karim, AAG for the State.