Act of offender
Correct Letter of Law
Intention behind
Coupled with Spirit
If intention behind an act is ignored, injustice is caused
dusyant@dsipowerfactorsinfolysis.com
Home
E-Books
Laws against Lies in Courts
Law of Perjury – An Outline
Problem of Proof Vs. Truth
Motto of Court: Satyamev Jayate (Truth shall Triumph)
History & development of law of perjury
Re: Suo Moto Proceedings against Mr. R. Karuppan, (2001) 5 SCC 289
Law of ‘false evidence’: Indian Penal Code, 1860
False Evidence & Offences against Public Justice: Ch.XI IPC
Defining offence(s) of ‘false evidence’
Other offence(s) against public justice
Offence(s) of ‘perjury’ coupled with ‘forgery’
Salient features of Law of Perjury in India
Perjury: A Non-Compoundable offence
Huge punishment: upto 7 yrs, may extend to death penalty
Specifically defining 'giving false evidence’ & ‘fabricating false evidence’
Extended canvas of giving false evidence: Ss.196 to 200 IPC
Reach of the provisions of law of perjury
Expanded Forms: Ss.191, 192, 196, 197, 198, 199 & 200 IPC :: ‘Giving false evidence’/‘Fabricating false
Expanded form: S.205 IPC: An offence against administration of justice
Court’s control on prosecutions for perjury
Maintaining Check & Balance: Court’s control Vs. Justice to individual
M. L. Sethi Vs. R. P. Kapur & Anr, AIR 1967 SC 528
Emperor Vs. Purshottam Ishvar Amin, (1921) 23 Bom LR 1
Virindar Kumar Satyawadi Vs. The State of Punjab, AIR 1956 SC 153
Cut-Short Summary procedure for ‘obvious’ perjury by ‘witnesses’
Serious failures of Law of Perjury in India
Fate of Perjury in India: Legally Curious Cases
Dr. S. Dutt Vs. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 523
G. Srinivasa Ayyangar Vs. Ramasami Ayyangar & Anr, AIR (32) 1945 Mad 9
K.S. Subramania Ayyar Vs. Swamikannu Chetty, AIR 1933 Mad 413
Perjury: Hon’ble Courts’ ‘saying’ Vs. ‘actual doing’
Re: Suo Moto Proceedings against Mr. R. Karuppan, (2001) 5 SCC 289
Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Vs. The State, (2010) 174 DLT 214
H. S. Bedi Vs. National Highway Authority of India RFA No.784/2010 (DHC)
Surajpal Singh Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, RFA No.110/2015 (DHC)
Gagan Myne Vs. Ritika Bakshi, RFA No.125/2015, (DHC)
‘Quantum of punishment’ on perjurers Vs. Leniency
State Vs. ASI Shankar Lal etc. Misc. No.01/09
Delays in disposing S.340 Cr.P.C. applications: Blessing to perjurers
Maria Margarida Sequeria Fernandes Vs. Erasmo Jack de Sequeria, (2012) 5 SCC 370
Laxminarayan Deepak Ranjan Das Vs. K.K. Jha & Ors., 1999 Cr.L.J. 4200
Kuttiah Vs. Federal Bank Ltd., 2006 Cr.L.J. 3541
Rajeev Choudhary @ Rajeev Kumar Vs. State Crl. Rev. No.1068 of 2018
Mohd. Zahid Vs. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, AIR 1998 SC 2023
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Vs. Union of India, 1992 Cr.L.J. 3752
Why this book?
Complaining ‘paradox’: Victim of perjury cannot complain
Courts having power to complain: Normally, don’t complain
Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. Vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr, (2005) 4 SCC 370
Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Vs. The State, (2010) 174 DLT 214
Padmawati V. Harijan Sewak Sangh, 154 (2008) DLT 411
IRCON International Limited Vs. Union of India, 108 (2003) DLT 656
Hopelessness of victims of Perjury
Subrata Roy Sahara Vs. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470
K. Narayanaswami Reddiar Vs. T. Kolandaivelu Chettiar & Anr, AIR 1970 Mad 267
Provisions of law of Perjury: Too much ignorance/confusion
Tasleema Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors, WP (Crl.) No.758/2008
Confused mixing:S.340 Cr.P.C. procedure ~ S.344 Cr.P.C. Summary procedure
Jaskaran Vs. State of Haryana, 2008 Cr.L.J. 4261
Ismail Khan Vs. The State, 1992 Cr.L.J. 3566
Ravuri Manohar Babu Vs. State of A.P., 2005 Cr.L.J. 3562
Vittappan Vs. State, 1987 Cr.L.J. 1994
Problem of Perjury: Advocates ~ Abettors of Perjury?
Subrata Roy Sahara Vs. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470
Chandrapal Singh Vs. Maharaj Singh, AIR 1982 SC 1238
Padmawati Vs. Harijan Sewak Sangh, 154 (2008) DLT 411
Problem of Perjury in India
Problem of Perjury: Superior Courts echoing concern
Assessment of prevalence of perjury: Judicial Notice
Subrata Roy Sahara Vs. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470
Chandra Shashi Vs. Anil Kumar Verma, (1995) 1 SCC 421
Mohan Singh Vs. Amar Singh, (1998) 6 SCC 686
Satyender Singh Vs. Gulab Singh, 2012 (129) DRJ 128
Concern with inactivity of Courts
Swaran Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2000) 5 SCC 668
Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Vs. The State, (2010) 174 DLT 214
H. S. Bedi Vs. National Highway Authority of India, RFA No.784/2010 (DHC)
A. Hiriyanna Gowda V. State of Karnataka, 1998 Cri.L.J. 4756
Problem of Perjury: Curative Approach
Judicial Activism to tackle problem of perjury
Curious example: How to deal with ‘false evidence/case’
Kuldeep Kapoor Vs. Susanta Sengupta, 126 (2006) DLT 149
Real Cause(s) of Concern
Dutiful justice dispensation Vs. Quashing of prosecutions for perjury
Perumal Vs. Janki, Crl. A. No.169 of 2014
Mohd. Zahid Vs. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, AIR 1998 SC 2023
Judicial Interpretations Vs. Overlooking Cognate provisions of law
Baban Singh & Anr Vs. Jagdish Singh & Ors, AIR 1967 SC 68
Offences U/Ss.196 to 200 IPC: Punishable as ‘giving false evidence’
U Mistir Wallang Nongseh Vs. Ka Ephreban Wallang Nongseh, AIR 1954 Assam 259
Incoherent judicial precedents & Amnesia
Jai Bhagwan Vs. State (GNCT Delhi), Crl. A. Nos.2298 & 2299 of 2009 (SC)
Judicial interpretations Vs. Legislative intent
Overlooking the changes/amendments in law
Virindar Kumar Satyawadi Vs. The State of Punjab, AIR 1956 SC 153
Beni Prasad Vs. State of U.P., 1977 Cr.L.J. 1632
Shiv Prasad Paliwal Vs. State of Rajasthan, 1992 Cr.L.J. 357
Sheshamma Vs. Venkamma, AIR 1926 Mad 238
Requirement of ‘conviction reasonably probable’ OR ‘likely to be guilty’
Prof. Chintamani Malviya Vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Crl. A. No.649 of 2018
S.P. Kohli Vs. High Court of Punjab & Haryana, AIR 1978 SC 1753
P.D. Jain & Anr Vs. H.S. Sehgal & Anr, 1976 Cr.L.J. 374 (Delhi)
Requirement of falsehood being on ‘matter of substance’
Mohammad Khudabax Vs. King Emperor, AIR (36) 1949 Nag 303
Rajeev Choudhary @ Rajeev Kumar Vs. State Crl. Rev. No.1068 of 2018
Ignorance about latest rulings of Supreme Court
Preliminary Inquiry: NOT mandatory
Dr. M. K. Wats Vs, State & Ors, 162 (2009) DLT 613
Rajeev Choudhary @ Rajeev Kumar Vs. State Crl. Rev. No.1068 of 2018
Notice to perjurer not required before making complaint U/S.340 Cr.P.C.
Jai Bhagwan Vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) Crl. A. Nos.2298 & 2299 of 2009 (SC)
Giving False Evidence: S.191 IPC
Defining ‘giving false evidence’
Ingredients break-up of S.191 IPC
Scope & Object of S.191 IPC
“Whoever”
‘is said to give false evidence’
Definition of ‘evidence’: Chapter XI IPC Vs. S.3 Evidence Act, 1872
‘Materiality’ of ‘false statement’: Legislative intent
Mohammad Khudabax Vs. King Emperor, AIR (36) 1949 Nag 303
Durga Prasad Vs. Emperor, AIR 1933 All 318
‘bound by an oath’ to state the truth
Oaths Act, 1969
Notaries Act, 1952
False statements in ‘Affidavits’: Covered in S.191 IPC
Ranjit Singh Vs. The State of Punjab, AIR 1959 SC 843
Baban Singh & Anr Vs. Jagdish Singh & Ors, AIR 1967 SC 68
Murray & Co. Vs. Ashok Kumar Newatia (2000) 2 SCC 367,
Re: Suo Moto Proceedings against Mr. R. Karuppan, (2001) 5 SCC 289
Dr. (Smt.) Shipra Vs. Shri Shanti Lal, AIR 1995 Raj 50
New World Resources Vs. Mahesh S. Parekh, Perjury Petition No.1 of 2018
Delhi Lotteries Vs. Rajesh Aggarwal & Others, AIR 1998 Del 332
‘Affidavits’ in evidence in Cr.P.C.
Statements recorded by Magistrate U/S.164 Cr.P.C.
Emperor Vs. Purshottam Ishvar Amin, (1921) 23 Bom LR 1
‘bound by an express provision of law’ to state the truth
Some express provisions of law binding ‘to state the truth’
Order 6 Rule 15 CPC
Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Vs. The State, (2010) 174 DLT 214
State of Punjab Vs. I.M. Lall, ILR 1975 Delhi 332
Emperor Vs. Padam Singh, AIR 1930 All 490
Raj Kumar Dhar Vs. Colonel A. Stuart Lewis, AIR 1958 Cal 104
Venkatrama Reddi Vs. Srinivasa Reddi & Anr, AIR 1936 Mad 350
Order 6 Rule 15A CPC for Commercial Courts Act, 2015
Section 161(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Falsity in FIRs & Signed statements
Kallu & Others Vs. State of U.P., Crl. Appeal No.2333 of 2013
Section 282 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 132 of Evidence Act, 1872
Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
Section 83 of Representation of the People Act, 1951
Dr. (Smt.) Shipra Vs. Shri Shanti Lal, AIR 1995 Raj 50
Section 108 of The Customs Act, 1962
Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966
State of U.P. Vs. Durga Prasad, AIR 1974 SC 2136
‘bound by law’ to make a ‘declaration upon any subject’
“declaration”
Perumal Vs. Janki, Crl. A. No.169 of 2014
‘bound by law to make a declaration upon a subject’
False statements in Pleadings & Reports
H. S. Bedi Vs. National Highway Authority of India, RFA No.784/2010 (DHC)
Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Vs. The State, (2010) 174 DLT 214
‘makes any Statement which is false’
‘makes any statement’
‘which is false’
Sanjay Baburao Gitte Vs. State of Maharashtra, Crl. A. No.307/2016
Knowledge of falsity
‘knows to be false’
Shahzad Khan Vs. Emperor, AIR 1933 Pat 513
‘believes to be false’
Tasleema Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors, WP (Crl.) No.758/2008
‘does not believe to be true’
Mohammad Hussein Kasab Motiwala Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, 1995 Cr.L.J. 2364 (DB)
Proving falsity of a statement
Proving falsity with the help of other material or documents
Parmanand Parwar Vs. Kartarnath, AIR 1924 Nag 35
Rangaswami Reddiar Vs. Gunnammal, AIR 1966 Mad 456
Proving falsity through ‘absolute’ inconsistency/ ‘patent’ contradiction
Umrao Lal Vs. State, AIR 1954 All 424
In Re: Bijjli Papamma & Anr, AIR 1948 Mad 471
Harji Vs. The State, AIR (37) 1950 Ajmer 37(2)
Contradictory Statements: Charging the accused: S.221 Cr.P.C.
Gangawwa Vs. State of Mysore, AIR 1969 Mys 114
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Atchamma & others, AIR 1948 Mad 487
Public Prosecutor Vs. Nagalinga Reddy, AIR 1959 AP 250
Emperor Vs. Purshottam Ishvar Amin, (1921) 23 Bom LR 1
Distinction & overlapping: S.191 IPC ~ S.199 IPC
Distinction between S.191 and S.211 IPC
S.195A IPC: Threatening any person to give false evidence
Amendment in Cr.P.C corresponding to S.195A IPC
Ganesh Adhikari Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr (Cr.R. No.501 of 2013),
Fabricating false evidence: S.192 IPC
Defining ‘fabricating false evidence’
Ingredients break-up of S.192 IPC
Scope & Object of S.192 IPC
‘is said to fabricate false evidence’
Maharashtra State Elec. Dist. Co. Vs. Datar Switchgear Ltd. & Ors. Crl.A. No.1979 of 2010
Bhagirath Lal Vs. Emperor, AIR 1934 All 1017
‘causes any circumstance to exist’
“Causes”
‘any circumstance to exist’
‘makes false entry in book or record or electronic record’
‘making any false entry’
‘book’ or ‘record’
‘electronic record’
Lincoln J. Willis Vs. Shamsul Haq & Ors, 1974 Cr.L.J. 23
Kamla Prasad Singh Vs. Hari Nath Singh, AIR 1968 SC 19
Jatindra Nath Sahu Vs. Emperor, AIR 1937 Cal 42
‘makes a document/ electronic record containing false statement’
When false document is prepared but not filed in Court
State of Karnataka Vs. Hema Reddy & Anr, AIR 1981 SC 1417
When false document is prepared and produced in Court
Dr. S. Dutt Vs. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 523
When document is custodia-legis
Patel Laljibhai Somabhai Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 1971 SC 1935
Intention U/S.192 IPC
‘intending such circumstance… may appear in evidence’
Mohd. Zahid Vs. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, AIR 1998 SC 2023
‘so appearing … may cause … erroneous opinion touching point material …’
Babu Lal Vs. State of UP & Ors, AIR 1964 SC 725
K.S. Subramania Ayyar Vs. Swamikannu Chetty, AIR 1933 Mad 413
‘so appearing in evidence’
‘may cause'
Supt. & Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Bengal Vs. Tarak Nath Chatterjee, AIR 1935 Cal 304
‘any person …. in such proceeding’
‘who … is to form an opinion upon the evidence’
‘to entertain an erroneous opinion’
‘touching any point material’
‘to the result of such proceeding’
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Vs. Union of India, 1992 Cr.L.J. 3752
Interplay between Ss.191, 192 & 199 IPC
Distinction & overlapping: S.191 & S.192 IPC
Distinction & overlapping: S.191 IPC ~ S.192 IPC ~ S.199 IPC
Baban Singh & Anr Vs. Jagdish Singh & Ors, AIR 1967 SC 68
False/ incorrect ‘record’ or ‘document’: Different Intention ~ Different Offence
If the document is a record U/S.167 IPC
If the document is a Certificate U/S.197 IPC
If the document is a ‘declaration’ U/S.199 IPC
When the document is a record U/S.218 IPC
Kamla Prasad Singh Vs. Hari Nath Singh, AIR 1968 SC 19
If the document is a record U/S.219 IPC
Govind Mehta Vs. The State of Bihar, AIR 1971 SC 1708
If it is a forged/false document U/S.463/464 IPC
If the document is forgery of Court record U/S.466 IPC
‘in a judicial proceeding, or before a public servant as such, or arbitrator’
‘in a judicial proceeding’
Section 22 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
Section 108 of The Customs Act, 1962
‘proceeding taken by law before a public servant as such’
Emperor Vs. Ismail Khudirsab, AIR 1928 Bom 130
‘proceeding before an arbitrator’
Maharashtra State Elec. Dist. Co. Vs. Datar Switchgear Ltd. & Ors. Crl. A. No.1979 of 2010
Species & Forms of Perjury
Other species of perjury punishable as ‘giving false evidence’: Ss.196, 197, 198, 199 & 200 IPC
S.196 IPC: Using evidence known to be false
Ingredients break-up of S.196 IPC
Scope & Object of S.196 IPC
“corruptly”
Emperor Vs. Rama Nana Hogavne, AIR 1922 Bom 99
Dr. S. Dutt Vs. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 523
‘uses’ or ‘attempts to use’
‘any evidence … he knows to be false or fabricated’
‘gave or fabricated false evidence’
S.196 IPC r/w S.193 IPC contrasted with S.471 IPC r/w S.465 IPC
S.197 IPC: Issuing or signing false certificate
Ingredients break-up of S.197 IPC
Scope & Object of S.197 IPC
‘issuing’ or ‘signing’ a certificate
‘required by law to be given or signed’
Ranbir Singh Vs. State, 41 (1990) DLT 179
‘relating to a fact of which such certificate is by law admissible in evidence'
‘knows or believes to be false’
‘false in any material point’
S.198 IPC: Using as true a certificate known to be false
Ingredients break-up of S.198 IPC
Scope & Object of S.198 IPC
‘such certificate’
Vijay Enterprises Vs. Gopinath Mahadev Koli, 2006 (4) Bom CR 701
‘knows to be false’
‘false in any material point’
Tasleema Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors, WP (Crl.) No.758/2008
S.199 IPC: False statement … in ‘declaration’ which is by law receivable as evidence
Ingredients break-up of S.199 IPC
Scope & Object of S.199 IPC
M.S. Jaggi Vs High Court of Orissa & Anr, 1983 Cr.L.J. 1527
‘in any declaration’
‘made or subscribed’
Manlayak Singh Vs. Ramkirit & ors, AIR 1940 Pat 631
‘Court of Justice’ or ‘public servant’ or ‘other person’
King Emperor Vs. B.K. Pal, AIR 1947 Pat 54
‘bound’ or ‘authorised’ by law to receive as evidence of any fact
Baban Singh & Anr Vs. Jagdish Singh & Ors, AIR 1967 SC 68
‘touching any point material to the object for … declaration’
Jotish Chandra Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1969 SC 7
‘knows or believes to be false’
Adikanda Swain Vs. Emperor, AIR 1947 Pat 251
S.200 IPC: Using as true such declaration knowing it to be false
Ingredients break-up of S.200 IPC
Scope & Object of S.200 IPC
‘uses’ or ‘attempts to use’
‘such declaration’
‘knows to be false’
Explanation in S.200 IPC as to ‘inadmissibility’
Shahzad Khan Vs. Emperor, AIR 1933 Pat 513
Punishments for ‘false evidence’: Ss.193 to 195 IPC
