A case of perjury under CrPC 340 where even though some witnesses had given contradictory statements in civil and criminal cases between same parties, a perjury case under CrPC 340 was not allowed by high court, due mainly to technicalities about applicability of CrPC 340 to facts of the case. You can read the important points made bold in the full judgment below: CRM No.23818-M of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.23818-M of 2009 Date of Decision: 4.09.2009 Smt.Sanjay Lata & Anr. …Petitioners Vs. The State of Haryana & Anr. ..Respondents Coram: …[Continue Reading]
CrPC 340 procedure cannot be bypassed by trial court
This Punjab and Haryana High court judgment says that if an application under CrPC 340 is moved (for filing false affidavit in this case), then the court must undertake the procedure for CrPC 340 in disposing that application. It was not correct on part of trial court to refer cursorily to the mentioned fact of false affidavit in judgment, and thus dismissing the CrPC 340 application by being silent on the issue. So the takeaway for people facing false 498a and maintenance cases is to go for perjury application under CrPC 340 if you have good evidence like false affidavit, …[Continue Reading]
False rape allegation can lead to prosecution under Perjury
The headline says it all. It should be common sense, but common sense is something people not expect from Indian courts, because to take just one example — common sense, and jurisprudence says that “justice delayed is justice denied”… we know the rest. Now the full SC judgment below. Read the sentences in bold if you cannot read it all: ——————————————————————–IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NOS. OF 2008 (CRIMINAL MISC. PETITIONNOS.8515-8516 OF 2008) Mahila Vinod Kumar i ….. Petitioner Versus State of Madhya Pradesh …..Respondent JUDGMENT Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Heard …[Continue Reading]
Recent Comments