Giving false evidence

Any person who deliberately utters a false statement during the solemn proceedings of a Court of law, knowing it to be false does not deserve any leniency and ought never be let off lightly

Tendency on the part of the Courts to take a tolerant and indulgent view of such cases tends to encourage perjury in the Courts with the result that it has now become so common that witnesses do not feel any qualm of conscience while making a false statement in a Court of law and have ceased to consider it as an act involving any moral turpitude

Courts must rest this tendency with a firm hand and do everything in their power to eradicate this evil from its roots by awarding stiffer sentences, which would be a positive step in this direction.

Preliminary inquiry is not mandatory against a witness for giving false evidence and a complaint can be filed without hearing person to be proceeded against

Court is duty bound to lodge complaint against the offending person.

Section 193 of the P.P.C. envisages that whoever intentionally gives false evidence in a judicial proceeding shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

Appellants assailed order passed by District Judge whereby the application filed by respondent for cancellation of succession certificate was accepted and appellants were ordered to be proceeded under law for giving false evidence

Validity

Appellants had admitted in their objections before the court that they intentionally gave false evidence to deprive the legal heirs of deceased and include an unconcerned person in the list of his legal heirs to obtain share from the legacy of deceased, thus they were liable to be taken to task for their illegal act

Appeal was dismissed.

When the statement of a witness apparently appears to be false to his knowledge, he should be tried for perjury and if the offence is proved he should be awarded exemplary punishment so that the professional witnesses are eliminated from the proceedings in the courts of justice.

If a false statement is a result of some bona fide belief or bona fide mistake, it would be sufficient for causing a cut at roots of the charge.

Application filed by decree-holder for execution of decree was admitted subject to legal objections and verification of the judgment and applicant/judgment-debtor filed objections

Decree-holder filed application under Ss.195(1)(b)(c) and 476, Cr.P.C. praying therein that judgment-debtor be summarily tried and punished according to law

Court below accepted said application of decree-holder, convicted judgment-debtor for offence punishable under S.193, P.P.C.; and cognizance of said offence was taken against him under Ss.195(1)(b)(c) & 476, Cr.P.C. vide impugned order

Validity

Judgment-debtor, merely had filed the objections by way of counter affidavit in which he had brought the real facts before the court and had not concealed the true facts and had not given a false statement before the court

Impugned order passed by the court below was very hasty order, and court was oblivious of the fact that such order would prejudice the case of judgment-debtor and would influence the Magistrate

Court below had passed the impugned order without waiting for the verification of the judgment and record, or calling the judgment-debtor, who had submitted objections by way of affidavit and would have been subjected to cross-examination to illicit truth

Impugned order was set aside, in circumstances.