Conviction set aside for procedural errors, contempt upheld. Emphasis on procedural requirements and limited court powers.

The Court set aside the petitioner's conviction under Section 193 IPC due to procedural irregularities in not following the requirements of Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. The conviction and sentence for contempt of Court under Article 129 of the Constitution were upheld. The Court emphasized the mandatory nature of procedural requirements and clarified its limited powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. The petitioner agreed not to seek compensation or challenge the conviction under Section 193 IPC.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Conviction under Section 193 IPC.
2. Contempt of Court under Article 129 of the Constitution of India.
3. Procedural requirements under Section 195 and Section 340 Cr.P.C.
4. Powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Conviction under Section 193 IPC:
The petitioner was convicted under Section 193 IPC for deliberately fabricating false records before the Court. The petitioner challenged this conviction, arguing that the Court did not follow the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), specifically Sections 195 and 340. Section 195 Cr.P.C. mandates that a complaint should be filed in a competent criminal court for offences under Section 193 IPC, and Section 340 Cr.P.C. prescribes the procedure for making such complaints. The Court acknowledged that the provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.C. are mandatory and no court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences mentioned therein without a written complaint as required under that Section. The Court concluded that its order convicting the petitioner under Section 193 IPC was without jurisdiction and did not follow the due procedure prescribed by law.

2. Contempt of Court under Article 129 of the Constitution of India:
The petitioner was also convicted for contempt of Court under Article 129 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner did not challenge this conviction. The Court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed under Article 129, noting that the petitioner had already undergone the sentence for contempt of Court.

3. Procedural Requirements under Section 195 and Section 340 Cr.P.C.:
The Court emphasized that the provisions under Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. are mandatory. Section 195 Cr.P.C. bars private prosecutions for offences like giving false evidence under Section 193 IPC and stipulates that only the court in relation to which the offence was committed may initiate proceedings. Section 340 Cr.P.C. outlines the procedure for preferring a complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. The Court cited previous judgments, including Chajoo Ram v. Radhey Shyam & Anr., which stated that sanction from the court should be obtained first, and such sanction should be granted only in cases where perjury appears deliberate and conscious. The Court noted that it has no inherent power to make a complaint apart from the provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.C.

4. Powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India:
The Court discussed its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, which are curative in nature and cannot be used to supplant substantive law. The Court referred to the Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr., where it was held that Article 142 cannot be used to build a new edifice by ignoring express statutory provisions. The Court concluded that it could not have assumed jurisdiction by issuing a notice proposing conviction for forgery and making false statements under Section 193 IPC without following the procedure prescribed under Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. The order convicting the petitioner under Section 193 IPC was thus set aside.

Conclusion:
The Court set aside the conviction of the petitioner under Section 193 IPC, acknowledging that the procedure prescribed under Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. was not followed. The Court upheld the conviction and sentence for contempt of Court under Article 129 of the Constitution. The Court also noted the petitioner's undertaking not to claim any compensation or initiate any proceedings related to his conviction under Section 193 IPC.

---