In continuation of my order dated 6.10.2006 learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Addl: Sessions Judge has no authority under the law to discharge the notice, he should have proceeded u/S. 576 Cr.P.C. because a false certificate was submitted by the respondent before the said learned Judge regarding the writ petition, which was filed by his Senior learned counsel before this Court.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that respondent had misunderstood the message given to him, that while submitting his reply he had apology the said learned Addl: Sessions Judge, that he is a young man, newly entered in this profession and he under takes to be careful in future. He has relied upon PLD 1986 Peshawar 32, 2003 YLR 249, PLJ 1998 Criminal cases 950, PLD 1987 Lahore 214 and 1984 P.Cr. LJ 2797..
3. Learned Addl: A.G submits that as far as, offence under Section 193 PPC, is concerned, that's not applicable because it deals with giving of false evidence and the evidence is only made on oath, which has not been done in this case. Learned Addl A.G has referred Section 197 Cr.P.C. and submits that when respondent had admitted that the infoiination givenlay him was due to mis- understanding and he had also tendered unconditional apology, so he should be let off by giving a warning to be careful in future.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. As far as, offence u/S. 193 PPC is concerned, that's not applicable in this case and in this regard learned Addl. A.G has rightly made as statement before this Court. So far as, Section 177 PPC is concerned that's applicable, which is re-produced below.
"177. Furnishing false information. Whoever, being legally bdund to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, furnishes, as true, information on the subject which he knows or has reasons to believe to be false, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extent to six months or with fine _which may extent to (three thousand rupees) of with both; 'or, if the information which he is illegally bound to given respects the commissions of an offence, or is required for the purpose of preventing the commission of an offence, or in order to the, apprehension of an offence, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to two years or with fine or with both".
The word mention therein that a person while making a statement should know that the statement, which he was making is false but respondent while submitting his reply had stated that due to mis-, understanding he had conveyed a wrong information regarding the order passed by this Court to the learned Addi: Sessions Judge.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the above said section, I am of the considered opinion that offence u/S. 193 PPC is not applicable but Section 177 PPC is applicable in this case. However# respondent while submitting his reply had stated that due to misunderstanding, as the message was not properly heard by him, he submitted a wrong certificate before the learned Addl: Sessions Judge regarding the order passed by this Court in writ petition and he had also tendered unconditional apology and moreover, he has newly entered in this profession, so taking into considerations all these facts, this petition is disposed of with the observation that he is warned strictly to be careful in future and no further action is called in this petition.