Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Courts have recognized that false statements, especially those fabricated or made with mens rea, can be grounds for criminal proceedings, even if the primary dispute is civil in nature, provided the falsity is of a criminal nature and impacts justice ["Subham Roy Choudhury VS Sreejoyee Chakraborty - Calcutta"], ["Sunil Kumar Chaudhary VS Nandan Arya - Uttarakhand"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["Subham Roy Choudhury VS Sreejoyee Chakraborty - Calcutta"]- ["Sonia Tripathy vs State of Odisha - Orissa"]- ["CHITRA WD/O SHRIRAM GHONGADE AND 3 OTHERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. PSO, BHATKULI POLICE STATION, TQ. BHATKULI, DIST. AMRAVATI AND 2 ANR - Bombay"]- ["CHITRA WD/O SHRIRAM GHONGADE AND 3 OTHERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. PSO, BHATKULI POLICE STATION, TQ. BHATKULI, DIST. AMRAVATI AND 2 ANR - Bombay"]- ["Sunil Kumar Chaudhary VS Nandan Arya - Uttarakhand"]
In civil litigation, disputes often heat up when one party accuses the other of making false statements in pleadings or objections. Imagine this scenario: the respondent files an objection containing what you believe is a blatantly false statement. Can the petitioner then approach the Civil Judge to kickstart criminal proceedings against them? This is a common dilemma in Indian courts, balancing the need to uphold truth in judicial proceedings with preventing misuse of criminal law in civil matters.
Important Disclaimer: This article provides general information based on legal precedents and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific case.
The question arises: In an objection filed by the respondent, one statement is false. Can the petitioner file an application before the Civil Judge to initiate criminal proceedings against the respondent who filed the false objection?
Short Answer: Yes, generally, the petitioner can file an application under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) before the Civil Judge. This section empowers the court to inquire into offences like giving false evidence under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) if it's expedient in the interest of justice. However, this isn't automatic—the court must conduct a preliminary inquiry, apply its judicial mind, and ensure there's prima facie evidence of falsehood affecting the administration of justice. Mechanical initiation or treating the objection as a direct complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC is not permitted and may lead to quashing. Satyanarayan Nandkishor Pande VS Vijaykumar Gulabchand Sarda - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 3027
Civil courts have inherent powers under Section 340 CrPC to address false statements in proceedings before them, including objections or pleadings, especially if verified or on oath. As held, Filing of false affidavits or making false statement on oath in Court aims at striking a blow at the Rule of Law... It would be a great public disaster if the fountain of justice is allowed to be poisoned. Satyanarayan Nandkishor Pande VS Vijaykumar Gulabchand Sarda - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 3027 (citing Dhananjay Sharma v. State of Haryana).
Section 340(1) CrPC states: When, upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 195... Satyanarayan Nandkishor Pande VS Vijaykumar Gulabchand Sarda - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 3027
In practice, courts have directed inquiries for false affidavits in civil suits, emphasizing that deliberate falsehood on a matter of substance warrants action. Perjury proceedings should only proceed if there's a prima facie opinion of sufficient grounds, not mere suspicion or inaccuracy. James Kunjwal VS State Of Uttarakhand - 2024 6 Supreme 159
Civil courts must exercise caution to prevent converting civil disputes into criminal ones.
The protest application filed by the defendant to traverse the claim of plaintiffs/other side in the suit would not be considered as a complaint as defined under section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C... Therefore, it would be fallacious to appreciate the bare protest application filed before Civil Judge... as a petition under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. Harischandra s/o Vishwanath Chavan VS State of Maharashtra - 2017 0 Supreme(Bom) 374
Directing police investigation or FIRs on mere objections exceeds jurisdiction. In one case, the Civil Judge was quashed for appreciating the allegations nurtured on behalf of defendants against the plaintiff and exceeding his jurisdiction by exercising powers of a Magistrate. Harischandra s/o Vishwanath Chavan VS State of Maharashtra - 2017 0 Supreme(Bom) 374TRIDENT STEEL AND ENGINEERING CO VS VALLOUREC - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1867
Even if allegations seem civil, quashing solely on that ground isn't automatic if offence ingredients are met. SAU. KAMAL SHIVAJI POKARNEKAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2019 6 Supreme 474M. Krishnan VS Vijay Singh - 2001 7 Supreme 397
Several judgments reinforce these principles:
False statements in affidavits aren't evidence per se under the Evidence Act, aiding quashing where no offence under IPC 193/199 is made out. Anil Kumar Mishra VS State of Jharkhand - 2013 Supreme(Jhk) 724
To strengthen your application:1. File Detailed Application: Under Section 340 CrPC, attach evidence like contradicting records or affidavits proving falsehood.2. Preliminary Inquiry: Expect the Civil Judge to hold one, recording findings on expediency before complaining to a Magistrate.3. Avoid Parallel Remedies: Don't mix with Section 156(3); focus on court-specific offences.4. Challenge Rejection: Use revision or Section 482 CrPC if mala fide.5. Risks: Frivolous claims invite Section 250 CrPC costs. Indian Oil Corporation VS NEPC India LTD. - 2006 6 Supreme 66
While Section 340 CrPC offers a vital tool to combat falsehoods in civil objections, it's not a weapon for vengeance. Courts prioritize the interest of justice, demanding prima facie proof of deliberate perjury. Success hinges on evidence, not mere contradiction.
Key Takeaways:- Yes, file under Section 340 CrPC—but only with solid grounds. Satyanarayan Nandkishor Pande VS Vijaykumar Gulabchand Sarda - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 3027- No direct FIRs from civil courts on objections. Harischandra s/o Vishwanath Chavan VS State of Maharashtra - 2017 0 Supreme(Bom) 374- Prima facie deliberate falsehood essential; else, quashable.- Protect Justice: Falsehoods poison the system, but abuse erodes it.
Stay informed, act judiciously, and seek expert counsel to navigate these waters effectively.
#Section340CrPC, #PerjuryLaw, #CivilCourt
It is contended by the appellant that the said application was filed making false and fabricated statement and allegations of criminal nature against the appellant and his old parents on affidavit. ... In the memorandum of appeal it is stated by the appellant that the respondent herein filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C praying for maintenance against the appellant. The said application under Section 125 of the Cr.....
is not to branded as false evidence and herein, according to the petitioner, the contest is to the framing of charge on the premise that no criminal action to lie being a civil dispute between her and opposite party No.2. ... Gopal of Bombay HC, Nagpur Bench in Criminal Application No. 1115 of 2007 disposed of on 11th July, 2007. In addition to the above, one more decision in State Represented by Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Visakhapatnam Vs. ... It is not that eve....
In said proceedings, they have filed an affidavit stating that no civil or criminal litigation complaint bearing No.676 of 2019, filed by respondent nos.2 and 3. ... statement does not make it incumbent on the Court to initiate prosecution. ... The Civil Court upheld the objection and Criminal Revision Application No. 121 of 2019 and order dated span style="font-f....
According to the petitioner filing of false affidavit and giving false statement before this Court as well as drafting of such affidavit by respondent no.2 is amount to contempt of Court punishable under section 14 of the Act. ... in total 416, Special Civil Application No.12029 of 2015 was filed seeking direction to the Regional Provident Fund office to disburse the amount. ... He would further submit that petitioner has no locus s....
criminal proceedings under Section 340 of Cr.PC. ... Learned counsel submitted that the cross objection is filed by defendant No.5 seeking quashing of the direction issued for initiation of criminal proceedings. ... Therefore, directed the Registrar of City Civil Court to initiate criminal action under Section 340 of Cr.PC. ... Defendant No.5 in O.S.No.8215/1995 on the file of the learned XVII Additional City ....
The above narration establishes that the respondent no.2 intentionally filed false affidavit before the Court, Therefore, this Court requests Registrar, Judicial of this Court to file a complaint against the respondent no.2 in, the court of competent jurisdiction for filing a false affidavit.” ... filed a false affidavit before the High Court and as such, a direction was issued to the Registrar (Judl.) of the High Court to file a co....
Civil Application No. 133/05, objected to the permission to be granted to the petitioner to withdraw the petition on the grounds as mentioned in the civil application and in furtherance of the said civil application he has also submitted written synopsis. ... In support of the first objection, it has been submitted interalia that the statement made in para 13 is false. ... Shahfor the original petitioner#....
The petitioner has filed the application on the fact that the defendant has made contradictory statements in the judicial proceedings and still the defendant is proceeding with two statements. ... Mitra submits that still the defendant is continuing with both the proceedings though the respondent had the knowledge that they have made a false and fabricated statement on affidavit in different proceedings in relation with same matter.....
FILED TO INITIATE ENQUIRY U/S 340 OF CR.P.C. AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN I.A.No.3 FILED TO INITIATE ENQUIRY U/S 340 OF CR.P.C. ... The appellant with an intent to drag on the proceedings of the ejectment suit is filing one application after the other. ... On that contention, he filed application in I.A.No.3 to initiate action against the respondents for giving false....
to initiate civil and criminal proceedings against the plaintiff. ... withdrawal of the suit, but he should be given liberty to initiate civil and criminal proceedings against the respondent-plaintiff-S.Harshavardhan. ... appellant does not have any objection to the respondent withdrawing the suit, if the appellant is given liberty to initiate appropriate action, both c....
Therefore, there was long standing animosity between the parties herein. The respondent herein had also filed a criminal case against the present petitioner, bearing Criminal Case No. 423/10 which was a false case. Ajit Singh’s brother Kiran Singh had caught the respondent engaging in selling kerosene on the black market.
The respondent also filed an application I.A.No.1620/2016 to issue direction to the petitioner to undergo potency test to ascertain that he had no physical disability to perform sexual intercourse during the relevant period. 4. The petitioner filed an application as I.A.No.593/2016 in the Family Court praying that DNA test may be conducted to prove the paternity of the child born to the respondent. She asserted that she is ready to conduct DNA test, provided the petitioner would file an undertaking to the effect that he shall pay an amount of Rss.25,00,000/- as compensation, if the result of....
Now the question arose as to whether the aforesaid application, supported by affidavit, can be treated as an evidence? I find that petitioner filed an application before the learned Sessions Judge for taking action against Bhanu Prasad Singh, who, according to the petitioner, took provisional bail by giving a false statement. The said application, filed by petitioner, is supported with affidavit.
Therefore, in my opinion, there was a dispute that who is the owner of the property. In the suit filed by petitioner, an objection has also been filed by respondent No.1. Further the District Magistrate vide its order dated 16.7.1999, has restrained Sri Hari Singh, father of respondent No. 2 to 5 from selling out the property. At one time, respondent Nos.2 to 5 is also claiming that they are the owners of the property.
The trial court after considering the evidence on record vide order dated 11th August, 2005, declined to grant ex parte temporary injunction and issued notices to the defendant-respondent with the observation that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the application for grant of temporary injunction cannot be accepted ex parte and fixed the case for 29th August, 2005 and rejected the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff. The respondent-defendant filed objection to the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff and denied the allegations made therein. Alon....
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
