The facts giving rise to this petition under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. briefly are that one Haji Moree husband of Mst. Pannah Bibi petitioner, a well-to-do person, died in mysterious circumstances. He had no issue. The body was exhumed and a report regarding administration of poison was called from the Chemical Examiner who returned a negative report. It appears that during investigation Mst. Pannah Bibi petitioner produced one Wahid Bakhsh who stated that he had poisoned her husband at the instance of the latter's nephews. Wahid Bakhsh also made a subsequent statement before the police to the effect that his earlier statement admitting having poisoned the deceased was made by him at the instance of Mst. Pannah Bibi petitioner. Consequently a report was sent by the Sub-Inspector to the learned trial Magistrate against the petitioner under section 182/211, P. P. C. who framed charges against her under section 211, P. P. C. These proceedings are now challenged in this petition.
2. Having been taken through the record of the case, I find that in view of the fact that the deceased owned two squares of land and had no issue the petitioner suspected that the nephews pf her deceased husband had got him poisoned through Wahid Bakhsh. Although the allegations were falsified by the report of the Chemical Examiner who did not detect any traces of poison in the viscera of the deceased, the possibility of the petitioner having brought the allegations in a bona fide manner cannot be excluded. Again the statement of Wahid Bakhsh whom the petitioner had allegedly used as an instrument for poisoning her deceased husband cannot be implicitly relied upon as he appears to be a turn coat who had earlier made a statement favourable to the petitioner, lt does not stand to reason that the lady being convinced of the falsity of the allegation deliberately brought by her should have gone to the extent of getting the body of the deceased husband exhumed. The basic ingredient of an ofjfence under section 211 of the- P. P. C. is to bring a false charge with the intention of causing injury to a person. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, cannot avoid an impression that this old lady who had no issue having lost her husband entertained a bona fide belief of a foul play in regard to the death of her husband. In the circumstances, therefore, this essential ingredient of intentionally bringing a false charge to injure a person is missing and that further continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of Court. Accordingly 1 allow this petition and quash the proceedings which even otherwise, in the circumstances of the case, were to be conducted in the Court of Session. This also disposes of the connected Petition No. 3250 of 1966. .