• On 340 IPC, judgments needs urgently

We filled 340 ipc case   

fact of the case are-----  
1. The respondent deposed on oath " i was already divorced legally before my marriage with   respondent .xyz name, The respondent again herein again stated in his further cross examination that " it is correct that my divorce with my first wife took place on 18.02.2003 legally" But the divorce decree of the respondent from his first wife xxxxxx which was passed the Hon'ble court on dated 07/07/2003. respondent also not divorcee at the time of his marriage.
 
2. That the respondent further deposed on oath " i uploaded about my two children from my first marriage in that profile. it is incorrect to suggest that i did not mention about my two sons while uploading my profile for matrimonial alliance. which is a false statement document of said profile was submitted in the court.  

3.that the respondent in petition/ application under section 5 and 11 of hindu marriage act filed by him against petitioner. the document of opponent at very first instance present at hon'ble supreme court, mediation center as on dated 03/09/2010 further stated ...on submission of evidence by her above fact... i had made submission for withdrawing of my petition of xxxxx and hon family court judge xxxx has given permission and there is stay of hon'ble not given permission for withdrawing the petition .... but a  bare perusal of report dt. xyz and order dt xyz passed by the hon'ble supreme court of india reveals that respondent is telling a white lie. that the mediation proceeding between 
the parties fails on 11xx2010 and the hon'ble supreme court vide order dated 30xx2010  transferred the petition for divorce filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner herein from the ld. family court, to xxxx thas there was no reason cause or occasion for the respondent herein to come to know about petitioner's first divorec on 3rd and 6th sep 2010.

4.that not only this the honble court of xxxx distric judge family court xxx in his judgment dt xxxx of petition under section 5 and 11 of hma at page xxx para xx has observed Meaning thereby till xx july  200x petitioner husband was also not got legally divorce from his first wife." so petitioner was also not divorced at the time of solemnizing marriage with respondent marriage with respondent on xx xx xxxx. 
5. the respondent herein has stated himself a divorce in the petition for nullity which is supported by dully swore and attested affidavit of the respondent.
Asked 4 months ago in Criminal Law from Faridabad, Haryana
Religion: Hindu
section 191(IPC):- Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth, or being bound by law to make a declaration upon any subject, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, is said to give false evidence.

Explanation 1.–A statement is within the meaning of this section, whether it is made verbally or otherwise.

Explanation 2.–A false statement as to the belief of the person attesting is within the meaning of this section, and a person may be guilty of giving false evidence by stating that he believes a thing which he does not believe, as well as by slating that he knows a thing which he does not know.

Section 193 Punishment for false evidence (IPC):- Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine, and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case , shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23339 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
In the case of K. Karunakaran v. T.V. Eachara Warrier and Anr. , the Supreme Court held that the Court on an application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is primarily concerned with the question whether a prima facie case is made out which if un-rebutted may have a reasonable likelihood to establish a specific offence and whether it is also expedient in the interest of justice to take such action. The Court is really not concerned with the result of the main case. Once false statements are made in the proceedings of a suit, this would have a great bearing in forming of the opinion by the Court. The Supreme Court in the above case, where the complainant before the High Court under Section 340(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure stated that action should be taken against Shri Karunakaran for making false averments in the affidavit filed in a writ petition before the High Court, held as under :-

"26. It is well-settled that this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution would come to the aid of a party when any gross injustice is manifestly committed by a Court whose order gives rise to the cause for grievance before this Court. Even when two views are possible in the matter it will not be expedient in the interest of justice to interfere with the order of the High Court unless we are absolutely certain that the two pre-conditions which are necessary for laying a complaint after an enquiry under Section 340 are completely absent. The two pre-conditions are that the materials produced before the High Court make out a prima facie case for a complaint and secondly that it is expedient in the interest of justice to permit the prosecution under Section 193, IPC."
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23339 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
By posting the contents of the petition what do you want to clarify here?

Be clear in what you want clarify or what is your legal query?
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14138 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
honble high court stay the decree of nullity till the final disposal of the main petition.





Did you get the order? 

If so, you may verify the grounds on which the petition was taken on file and what was the judgment given by high court.
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14138 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
we need judgments on 340 ipc on false affidavit and on oath false statement
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14138 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
It is a case for invoking section 340. You do not require judgments on the provision as the judges know that false deposition on oath is punishable in accordance with the procedure prescribed under section 340. You have to lead documentary evidence to prove the false statements made by the respondent.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18183 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Criminal Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14138 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18183 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12131 Answers
233 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5244 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3537 Answers
130 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
443 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
873 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2771 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1950 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0