Allegations of perjury must be substantiated with admissible evidence; mere contradictory statements do not suffice for initiating perjury proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal under Section 341 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioner/husband in CMP No.215/2023 in O.P.No.367/2019 and O.P.No.389/2019 on the file of the Family Court, Thalassery, aggrieved by the order dated 29/09/2023, by which his petition alleging commission of perjury by the first respondent/wife and her counsel, the second respondent, has been dismissed.

2. CMP No.215/2023 was filed by the first respondent/husband in O.P.No.367/2019, which petition was filed by the petitioner/wife for return of her gold ornaments. The husband had moved O.P.No.389/2019 to get custody of the minor child. Pursuant to the marriage of the petitioner to the respondent on 02/11/2008 as per the rites and customs of the community to which they belong, a boy child was born to them, who is presently 12 years old. After the marriage, the parties lived in Qatar till 2018. The marital relationship broke up due to the respondent/wife's extra marital relationship with a person named Kamarudheen. Though the petitioner/husband attempted to have reconciliation talks with the respondent/wife, it was of no avail. The respondent/wife filed several cases against the petitioner/husband and his family members in the Family Court as well as the JFCM Court, Thalassery. O.P.No.367/2019 and O.P.No.389/2019 were tried jointly. In O.P.No.389/2019 the petitioner/husband filed I.A.No.21/2022 for accepting a scan report pertaining to the pregnancy of the respondent/wife in addition to two other applications, namely, I.A.No.22/2022 for reopening the evidence and I.A.No.23/2022 to recall the respondent/wife for further examination. The trial court as per common order dated 14/06/2022 allowed I.A.No.21/2022 and I.A.No.22/2022. I.A.No.23/2022 was dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner/husband to prove the scan report by examining his witnesses for which the examination of the respondent/wife was found unnecessary. According to the petitioner/husband the scan report would show the illegitimate pregnancy of the respondent/wife, which report was obtained by him from the Malabar Hospital, Kozhikode. The scan report would clearly substantiate his case that the respondent/wife has an adulterous relationship with one Kamarudheen @ Faisal. In the proof affidavit filed by the respondent/wife she claimed that from 2015 onwards, she never had sex with the petitioner/husband. However, the scan report will show that she became pregnant during the month of August 2018. As the trial court did not allow the request of the petitioner/husband to recall the respondent/wife and to examine her further, he filed I.A.No.14/2022 to accept the witness list and summon officials from the Malabar Hospital, Kozhikode to prove the scan report. He also filed I.A.No.15/2022 to call for the medical records from the said hospital. The respondent/wife filed counter to both the applications denying the statements made therein by the petitioner/husband. The counter filed by the respondent/wife will show that she and her counsel has played fraud on the Court by not revealing the fact of her pregnancy, which amounts to perjury.

2.1. The petitioner/husband filed I.A.No.28/2022 before the trial court to direct the respondent/wife to instruct the authorities concerned of Mount Guide International School, where their minor child is studying, to permit him to visit the child. The respondent/wife filed counter to the said application contending that she was unaware of the fact that the petitioner/husband had not been permitted to enter the child's school. However, the respondent/wife in M.C.No.38/2019 on the file of the JFCM Court, Thalassery, prayed that the petitioner/husband should not be allowed to meet the child in school. The said statements made by the respondent/wife are contradictory, which also amounts to perjury. Further, the respondent/wife i