Back
G. CHANDRASEKHARAN
Nano Kernel Limited – Appellant
Versus
Interlace India Pvt. Ltd. , Represented by its President Mr. G. Ambalavanan – Respondent
ORDER :
This Miscellaneous Petition is filed praying to allow the perjury proceedings against Mr.G.Ambalavanan, President, Interlace India Pvt. Ltd. under Section 340 r/w. Section 195 (1) (b) (i) of Cr.P.C, 1973 for committing the offences punishable under Sections 193 and 199 r/w. Section 191 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners filed Criminal Original Petition No.20154 of 2022 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 5155 of 2013 on the file of learned Metropolitan Magistrate (FTCIII), Saidapet, Chennai. Respondent gave false evidence by filing a false complaint dated 17.01.2013 and recording a sworn statement on oath before learned Magistrate, Saidapet on 17.10.2013, for the purpose of being used to institute and proceed with the criminal proceedings against petitioners under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Respondent falsely stated in his complaint dated 17.01.2013 and thereafter, on oath before the learned Magistrate on 17.10.2013 that M/s. Interlace India Pvt. Ltd. had supplied goods and services to petitioners on various dates and against which, petitioners had issued a cheque bearing No.661755 dated 17.08.2012 for Rs.2,00,00,000/- (
Perjury proceedings cannot be initiated prematurely, and the completion of the trial in the underlying case is necessary before considering perjury allegations.
The court ruled that initiating perjury proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C requires clear evidence of falsehood that impacts judicial proceedings, not mere inaccuracies.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for an offence under Section 211, I.P.C. to be made out, the complaint must falsely charge a person with having committed an offence, with the....
The court's control over offences related to false evidence and public justice, and the necessity of a preliminary enquiry to determine the expediency of prosecution in the interest of justice.
(1) Offences referred to under Section 195(1)(b), Cr.P.C. will get attracted only with respect to a document after it has been produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court.(2) In a case....
Merely repeating allegations from an FIR as a defense does not constitute false evidence under Section 340 Cr.P.C., and proceedings for perjury require clear and convincing evidence of intentional de....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
