The main legal point established in the judgment is that prosecution for perjury should only be initiated in cases where perjury appears to be deliberate and conscious, and conviction is reasonably probable and likely. It is unwise to initiate proceedings for perjury against the maker of an F.I.R. simply because they disown its contents at trial, especially when there is material other than the statement recorded under Sec. 161.

N.S.Rao, J.

1. The short, but of some importance, question for determination in this appeal is as to whether the informant who resides from his earlier lodged F.I.R. by disowning its contents at trial, can subsequently be proceeded against on the charge of perjury.

2. The facts of the case lie in a small compass, Shambhu Nath Dutta, the appellant, had got a case registered in Police Station, Dhanbad on 4-10-1989 alleging therein commission of rape on his daughter Kumari Rini by one Arvind Nath Sahay. The Police, after carrying out investigations, had charge-sheeted Sahay. At the trial. Shambhu Nath Dutta appellant was examined as P. W. 4. In his that deposition, the appellant had admitted his signatures appearing on the F.I.R, but had not owned its contents. He had come out with the explanation that the police had obtained his signatures on a plain paper, and that they had subsequently, on their own, drawn up his purported statement on the same. The trial had ended in acquittal of Sahay. However, notice was issued to the appellant for his showing cause as to why ho should not be prosecuted and punished under Sec. 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for his intentionally giving false evidence at the trial by not supporting the prosecution case in line with the version contained in the F.I.R. He had filed his reply inter alia, stating that he had not perjured himself at trial had maintained that he had not reported about the rape having been committed upon his daughter by Sahay, but the police had secured his signatures on a blank piece of paper and subsequently recorded his purported statement thereon, without reading over the contents of the same to him. Vide the impugned judgment, his explanation was found false, and he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months sod a tine of Rs. 50, or in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for fourteen days, under Sec. 344 of the Code. Feeling aggrieved, he has preferred this appeal.

3. The object of Sec. 344 of the Code is not only to eradicate evils of perjury in an expeditious and summary way, but also to protect a witness from harassment against frivolous prosecution of the charge. Law is well settled that prosecution for perjury is to be initiated only in these cases where perjury appears to be deliberate and conscious, and conviction is reasonably probable and likely. Where the alleged perjury by a witness is not to materially affect the result of the trial, it will not be expedient to prosecute him for perjury. Janardhanan V/s. State of Kerala 1979 Madras Law Journal (Criminal) 49, is a case on the point that where there is material other than the statement recorded under Sec. 161, it would be unwise to initiate proceedings under Sec. 344 of the Code. The reasoning of that judgment equally applies to the cases, like one in hand, wherein maker of an F.I.R. is subsequently proceeded against on charge of perjury simply because of his reselling from its contents at the trial, instances are not wanting in which the police draws up statements of the witnesses without their even knowing anything about the contends thereof. It will not be wise to convict any such person on the charge of perjury simply because he does not own the version contained in his previous statement recorded by the police either under Secs. 154 or 161 of the Code.

4. For reasons stated above, this appeal succeeds and is hereby accepted. Conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside, and he is acquitted of the charge. The appellant is on bail Hit bail bonds are cancelled, and he is discharged from the liabilities of the same.