Contempt for false witness testimony where shifting versions and inducement undermined the truth-finding process and trial fairness.

A witness who materially shifted versions during a criminal trial was treated as having interfered with the truth-finding process, where the materials indicated inducement by money and possibly threats. The inquiry report was accepted after objections to the manner of inquiry were rejected, and the explanations offered for assets, deposits, and sources of funds were found not credible. On that basis, the conduct was characterised as contempt of court because it seriously undermined the administration of justice and the fairness of the trial process. The witness was sentenced to simple imprisonment and costs, with consequential directions for attachment of assets and income-tax proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the inquiry report established that the witness had changed stands because of inducement or coercion and whether such conduct amounted to contempt of court, warranting punishment and consequential directions.

Analysis: The inquiry report was accepted after rejecting objections to the manner of inquiry. The Court found that the proceedings were transparent, that the witness had materially shifted versions at different stages, and that the explanations regarding assets, deposits, and sources of money were not credible. On the materials before it, the Court concluded that money had been exchanged and that this was the main inducement for making statements inconsistent with the truth, though threat could also have played a role. The Court further held that the witness's conduct had seriously undermined the administration of justice and the fairness of the trial process.

Conclusion: The witness was held to have committed contempt of court and was sentenced to simple imprisonment and costs, with consequential directions for attachment of assets and income-tax proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: A witness who intentionally changes stands and frustrates the truth-finding process in a criminal trial, particularly by false or induced testimony, can be punished for contempt where the conduct amounts to a direct interference with the administration of justice.

---