The court upheld that proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. require evidential support before a decision can be made.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT th ON THE 29 OF AUGUST, 2025 MISC. PETITION No. 4361 of 2025 PRANAV SHARMA Versus SMT.ANJALI SHARMA D/O KALURAM SHARMA Appearance:

Shri Sheersh Agrawal - Advocate for the petitioner.

ORDER The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 12.07.2025 (Annexure P/7) passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in RCSHM No. 791/2023, whereby the application submitted by the petitioner/husband under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to initiate proceedings against the respondent/wife for submitting a false evidence by way of affidavit, has been directed to be decided after adducing evidence by the parties and the decision on the application has been kept pending.

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent/wife's claim for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (For short 'Act, 1955') is based on the affidavit and that affidavit being false, application under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. has been filed. It is submitted that if the application under Section 24 of the Act, Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA

1955 is allowed by the court based on the affidavit then the very purpose of filing the application under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. would be frustrated and therefore, prayed that the Family Court be directed to decide the application filed under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. first and then decide the application filed under Section 24 of the Act, 1955.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

4. Petitioner's sole case is based on one RTI information received vide Annexure P/5 from the Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, purported to be an employer of the respondent/wife, to substantiate his case that the information received under RTI is in respect of monthly income, which the respondent/wife is receiving from her employer. In the affidavit submitted by the respondent/wife, she has disclosed her income as Rs.26,000/- and as per the information received under the RTI, she has been receiving Rs. 34,000/-, therefore, the petitioner has filed an application under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. to initiate proceeding for producing false affidavit in the court. However, the Family Court has taken a correct view that such application can be decided only by adducing evidence, as the document submitted under RTI needs corroboration and evidence in support. On the basis of such document, the court cannot direct initiation of proceeding under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.. The court has consciously kept the decision pending on the application under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.. The counsel for the petitioner could not point out from the provisions of Section 340 Cr.P.C. or any authority on the point that such application is to be decided first in any proceeding filed by the parties and then such proceeding can proceed further.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA

5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the view taken by the Family Court is in consonance of law and does not call for any interference under the supervisory jurisdiction as enshrined under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

6. The petition of the petitioner sans merit and is hereby dismissed accordingly.