Hon’ble Supreme Court held that perjury proceedings initiated by Trial Court and High Court does not suffer from any infirmity and as such the petitions were dismissed,
As she resiled from the statement made during investigation, she was permitted to be cross-examined by the prosecution. She even denied to have lodged the first information report (Exh.P-1) and to have given any statement 1 to the police (Exh.P-2). In view of the statement of the petitioner, the two accused persons were acquitted by judgment dated 28.11.2001.
Another gem of the mindset of some women and her family members
Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that being a girl of tender age, she was pressurized by her mother and uncle to give a false report. This is at variance with the statement made in court during trial to the effect that she had not reported anything to the police.
Purpose of Section 344, Cr.P.C.
The purpose of enacting Section 344, Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 479-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Old Code’) appears to be further arm the Court with a weapon to deal with more flagrant cases and not to take away the weapon already in its possession. The object of the legislature underlying enactment of the provision is that the evil of perjury and fabrication of evidence has to be eradicated and can be better achieved now as it is open to the courts to take recourse to Section 340(1) (corresponding to Section 476 of the Old Code) in cases in which they are failed to take action under Section 344 Cr.P.C.
Conditions to initiate CrPC 344 proceedings
Mahila Vinod Kumari Vs State Of M.P on 11 July, 2008
For exercising the powers under the section the Court at the time of delivery of judgment or final order must at the first instance express an opinion to the effect that the witness before it has either intentionally given false evidence or fabricated such evidence. The second condition is that the Court must come to the conclusion that in the interests of justice the witness concerned should be punished summarily by it for the offence which appears to have been committed by the witness. And the third condition is that before commencing the summary trial for punishment the witness must be given reasonable opportunity of showing cause why he should not be so punished. All these conditions arc mandatory. [See Narayanswamy v. State of Muharashtra, (1971) 2 SCC 182].
Citations : [2008 SCC 8 34], [2008 KERLT 3 509], [2009 SCJ 1 89], [2009 SCJ 1 396], [2008 AIR SC 2965], [2008 SCR 10 869], [2008 SCALE 10 97], [2008 SLT 6 419], [2008 AIR SC 4989], [2009 MPJR 1 7], [2008 CALCRILR 2 490], [2009 ILR MP 332], [2008 KLD 2 513], [2008 RAJLW 3 2379], [2008 AIOL 814], [2009 BOMCR CRI SC 2 494], [2008 SCC CRI 3 414], [2008 AIC SC 69 189], [2008 AIR SCW 4989], [2008 CRLJ SC 3867]
Justice A.Mateen of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench directed the Additional Principal Judge Family Court to dispose of the application so moved by the petitioner under Section 340, 344 Cr.P.C. before proceeding further in accordance with law.
Syed Nazim Husain Vs Additional Principal Judge Family Court & Anr on 9 January, 2003
Is it a crime to lie under oath in India?
Any person can ‘seek the Public Servant to initiate Perjury Proceedings’
Section 340 of Cr.P.C. contains the law procedure that has to be followed in Perjury proceedings.
Section 195 of Cr.P.C contains offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence.
Court can initiate Perjury Proceedings, Suo moto
Section 344 of Cr.P.C contains the law procedure that the Court can invoke against any witness appearing in such proceeding who had knowingly or willfully given false evidence or had fabricated false evidence with the intention that such evidence should be used in such proceeding.
These are 30+ various provisions under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that cater to definition and punishment for various perjuries of opposite parties and other public servants.
As per CrPC sec 195(1)(a), the following is the list of 18 provisions of contempt to the lawful authority of public servants. Key here is, a complaint can only be filed by such public servant or by a superior officer of such public servant. Generally Police folks and their bosses, but there is not much history of police filing complaints to Court for the following offences.
IPC 172: Absconding to avoid service of summons or other proceeding
IPC 173: Preventing service of summons or other proceeding, or preventing publication thereof
IPC 174: Non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant
IPC 174A: Non-appearance in response to a proclamation under section 82 of Act 2 of 1974
IPC 175: Omission to produce document to public servant by person legally bound to produce it
IPC 176: Omission to give notice or information to public servant by person legally bound to give it
IPC 177: Furnishing false information
IPC 178: Refusing oath or affirmation when duly required by public servant to make it
IPC 179: Refusing to answer public servant authorised to question
IPC 180: Refusing to sign statement
IPC 181: False statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation
IPC 182: False information, with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person
IPC 183: Resistance to the taking of property by the lawful authority of a public servant
IPC 184: Obstructing sale of property offered for sale by authority of public servant
IPC 185: Illegal purchase or bid for property offered for sale by authority of public servant
IPC 186: Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions
IPC 187: Omission to assist public servant when bound by law to give assistance
IPC 188: Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant
For these 18 offences, an application u/s 340 CrPC can not be filed. Also no private complaint under 190/200 CrPC is maintainable by any other person, but representations may be made to the SHO of the Police Station concerned or to the Office of SP/CP.
As per CrPC sec 195(1)(b), the following is the list of 16 provisions of contempt to the lawful authority of Courts. Key here is, a complaint can only be filed by such Court or by such officer of the Court as that Court may authorise in writing in this behalf, or by a superior Court of such Court. Generally Trial Courts and their Appellate Courts. Again no private complaint under 190/200 CrPC is maintainable. For these 16 offences, an application u/s 340 CrPC can be filed; even by a stranger to the case.
IPC 193: Punishment for offenses u/s 191 & 192 IPC
IPC 194: Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence
IPC 195: Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of offence punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment
IPC 195A: Threatening any person to give false evidence
IPC 196: Using evidence known to be false
IPC 199: False statement made in declaration which is by law receivable as evidence
IPC 200: Using as true such declaration knowing it to be false
IPC 205: False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution
IPC 206: Fraudulent removal or concealment of property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution
IPC 207: Fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution
IPC 208: Fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due
IPC 209: Dishonestly making false claim in Court
IPC 210: Fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due
IPC 211: False charge of offence made with intent to injure
IPC 228: Intentional insult or interruption to public servant sitting in judicial proceeding
Terms used in judgments are misrepresentation, unclean hands, fraud on court, misuse of administration of justice etc if you are searching for judgments online.
Here are the judgments for your usage in your cases under above IPC sections.
IMP NOTE: Apart from the listed (and implied) sections, there are many more provisions of IPC which can be filed as a direct complaint as per 154 CrPC, 155 CrPC or 190/200 CrPC. The said procedure under sec CrPC 340 does not apply to those sections. Like IPC 218 etc.
Additionally, such contemnors are liable for punishment under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 as well, at the State High Court.