K.V. Muniswami Mudaliar vs Rajaratnam Pillai And Ors. on 12 April, 1922
5. The procedure to be followed in a case of complaint by the Court is essentially different from that obtaining in the case of any private person doing it in his own right. It is open to the court under Section 476, Cr. P. C., before which an offence is committed to prefer a complaint, and the special procedure prescribed by Section 476 which is supplemental to Section 195, constitutes that Court itself as the complainant. Under Section 476 the Court enquiring should satisfy itself that it is expedient in the interests' of justice to take such action (Vide K. V. Muniswami Mudaliar v. Rajaratnam Pillai,' AIR 1922 Mad 495 (FB) (A) ). The policy of law is not to allow private parties to take undue advantage of the right given . and misuse that right, to satisfy a private grudge. It is obvious that the Court filing the complaint should form its own opinion and not take the opinion from others secondhand. If the District Munsiff acts or purports to act, not of his own accord but at the direction of the District Judge it is held to be bad and such an act is, by implication, not warranted by the statute. In fact, under Section 476-B, the superior Court may itself make the complaint which the subordinate Court might have made under Section 476. That is the effect of the plain reading of the section Itself. The order of the District Judge is therefore illegal and without Jurisdiction.