TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Overturns Prosecution Order; Affidavit Offenses Require Specific Procedure Under Indian Penal Code.</h1> <h3>Baban Singh and Ors. Versus Jagdish Singh and Ors.</h3> The SC allowed the appeal, setting aside the HC's order for prosecution under Section 476 of CrPC. The Court determined that the false affidavits by the ... - Issues:Appeal under section 476-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure against a judgment and order of the High Court at Patna for making false affidavits. Interpretation of Section 479A in relation to the invocation of Section 476 for prosecution. Determination of whether the false affidavits constituted an offence under Section 199, Section 191, or Section 192 of the Indian Penal Code.Analysis:The case involved an appeal under section 476-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Baban Singh and his wife against a High Court order to file a complaint against them for making false affidavits. The High Court had ordered the Registrar to hold an inquiry regarding a compromise in a previous case, where Baban Singh and his wife were accused of fabricating evidence. The Registrar reported the compromise as genuine, leading to the High Court accepting the report. However, a question arose regarding the invocation of Section 476 due to the introduction of Section 479A, which deals with false evidence. The High Court ordered the Registrar to file a complaint under Section 199 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants, leading to the current appeal.The Supreme Court analyzed the applicability of Section 479A, which provides a special procedure for cases of false evidence in judicial proceedings. The Court noted that Baban Singh and his wife had intentionally fabricated false evidence by making false affidavits in the previous case. The Court emphasized that if false evidence was given by a witness, action under Section 479A alone could be taken. Since the appellants were witnesses who fabricated false evidence, the High Court should have followed the procedure under Section 479A for prosecution. Therefore, the Court concluded that the action under Section 476 was not permissible due to the provisions of Section 479A.The Court further delved into whether the false affidavits constituted an offence under Section 199, Section 191, or Section 192 of the Indian Penal Code. It was determined that the offence committed by Baban Singh and his wife fell within the ambit of Sections 191 and 192, as they had sworn falsely under oath and fabricated evidence intended for use in a judicial proceeding. The Court highlighted that the false affidavits were meant to mislead the court, making the offence more aligned with Sections 191 and 192 rather than Section 199 of the Indian Penal Code.In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the order for prosecution of the appellants. The Court emphasized that the complaint, if filed, should be withdrawn, as the action under Section 476 was not valid in this case due to the applicability of Section 479A and the nature of the offence committed by the appellants.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
