Short Note : 1. In the Sessions trial one issue was prosecuted for attempting to commit murder of applicant Shyam Sunder, forest guard, on 8-4-1976 at about 8 p.m. by firing a pistol at him as a result of which he received injuries on his right shoulder with multiple punctured wounds over right upper arm. Most of the prosecution witnesses in the case, except the Investigating Officer, were declared hostile including the present applicant who was the complainant in the case. In his first information report, Ex. P-I, the applicant had categorically stated that the accused had aimed the pistol at him with intention to take his life. However, contrary to report, in the Sessions Court on oath he had stated that it was a case of accidental discharge. Therefore, the learned Sessions Judge, while acquitting the accused, has observed that either the applicant had lodged a false report or given a false evidence in Court he directed that a notice be issued to the applicant to show cause why a complaint should not be made against him either for lodging a false report or for making a false statement in the Court. Held : The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the Sessions Judge, has not given a definite finding as to whether the FIR was false or the statement in the Court was false and in the absence of definite finding no action could be taken under section 344 (1) of the Code. In the present case, a definite finding has been given that either the FIR lodged by the applicant was false or his statement in Court was false because they gave contradictory version. Section 344 of the new Code replaces section 479 (A) of the old Code with an important change that the Court trying he can itself summarily try the offender for perjury though the Court has also been given option to file a complaint as was in the old Code. The order of the Sessions Judge is in compliance with section 344 (l) of the new Code and it is for the applicant to show in response to show cause notice as to how the two statement can be reconciled, one in the FIR and the other in the Courts. A complaint will be filed thereafter if the applicant is unable to show cause for not taking action against him. A complaint will be filed thereafter if the applicant is unable to show cause for not taking action against him. Dr. Pal Chaudhary v. State of Assam, AIR 1960 SC 133 distinguished. Revision dismissed.