while referring to the complaint petition, submits that upon perusal of the complaint petition, it appears that the grievance of the complainant is that the accused had given false genealogical table in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Officer, Madhupur claiming appointment as Pradhan by indicating that the accused was the descendant of the original Pradhan. He further submits that the complainant in the complaint petition has indicated that the genealogical table was incorrect and has given his own genealogical table. The complainant has also indicated that ultimately the learned Sub Divisional officer, Madhupur rejected the petition of the accused no.1 and accordingly, the accused no.1 was never appointed as Pradhan in Pradhani Appointment Case No.93 of 2009-10. In this background, it was alleged that the accused no.1 is guilty of offence under Section 193 of Indian Penal Code giving false written evidence in the court of Sub Divisional Officer, Madhupur and is also alleged to be guilty of offence under Section 196 of Indian Penal Code using false evidence in writing and it is alleged that the accused no.1 cheated by impersonation to the complainant as well as the learned court and is guilty of offence under Section 416 and 417 of Indian Penal Code and in this background, the complaint was filed for alleged offence under Sections 196, 193, 416, 417 and 120B of Indian Penal Code. 6. Counsel has referred to Section 195 of Cr.P.C and submits that as per the provisions of Section 195 (1) (b) (i) of Cr.P.C, any offence punishable under Sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, no court shall take cognizance except on the complaint in writing of the court or by such officer of the court as the court may authorize in writing in this on behalf or some other court to which the court is subordinate.
