JUDGMENT 1. In Criminal M.P. 250 of 1908. 2. The complaint against the accused is that on the 11th June last, the accused made a certain statement to the Police Officer making an investigation under Section 174, Criminal Procedure Code, as amended by Act V of 1887, and that on 6th July last he made another statement to the Chief Presidency Magistrate in the course of an enquiry into a certain case and that the two statements are so contradictory that the accused must necessarily be guilty of an offence under Section 193, Indian Penal Code, in respect of one or other of the statements. 3. The Chief Presidency Magistrate gave sanction for the prosecution on the above complaint. We arc asked to say that the sentence is invalid and to revoke it. 4. We do not find any ground for interference. 5. So far as the complaint is that the statement before the Police Officer is or may be false, no sanction is required; and any sanction given by the Magistrate may be treated as surplusage. 6. So far as the complaint is that the statement before the Magistrate is or may be false, the Chief Presidency Magistrate has given sanction. 7. No authority has been quoted before us to show that such a sanction is not sufficient to meet the requirements of Section 195, Criminal Procedure Code, in a case like the present. We think it is sufficient and dismiss the petition. 8. In Criminal M.P. No. 125 of 1908. 9. For the like reasons as are recorded above we dismiss this petition also.