2021 (8) TMI 1372 - HC - Indian Laws

Perjury - falsification of statements - respondent-wife supporting the application for maintenance had falsely stated as to her unemployment lack of income - HELD THAT - This Court is inclined to grant a limited indulgence in the matter as under and for the following reasons a) Petitioner's matrimonial cause for annulment of his marriage with the respondent, is pending before the Court below; respondent-wife who is a medical practitioner with Post Graduation, was then doing her 'Doctorate of Medicines' (ie., DM), is not in dispute; in the narrative affidavit filed by her in support of application for maintenance, she had claimed to be unemployed incomeless; the said application came to be rejected by the Court below vide order dated 06.02.2015 and the same is put in challenge. (b) Even before this Court, it is not the case of respondent that the copies of Income Tax Returns produced by the petitioner for opposing the claim for maintenance, do not pertain to her or that their contents are untrue/incorrect; when the Court below has recorded a specific finding as to the income of the respondent from the medical profession that too on the basis of undisputed IT Returns for the relevant period; when it has also recorded a specific finding that the respondent has suppressed the fact that she was earning income; that being the position, the application of petitioner for initiating action for the offence of perjury, could not have been turned down as being premature merely because main matter is still pending; consideration of such an application has nothing to do with the outcome of the main matter at all. This writ petition succeeds; impugned order is set at naught; matter is remitted for consideration afresh; till such consideration takes place, the main matter shall be parked at a bay.

Summary

Issues:
- Application for perjury under Section 151 of CPC and Section 301 of Cr.P.C. was rejected as premature by the Court below.
- Whether action for perjury can be initiated before the completion of police investigation.
- Interpretation of the Apex Court decisions in B.K. Gupta vs. Damodar H. Bajaj and Mahila Vinod Kumari vs. State of Madhya Pradesh in the context of perjury.
- Consideration of the seriousness of perjury and the need for effective action against false evidence in judicial proceedings.

Analysis:
1. Premature Rejection of Perjury Application: The petitioner sought to initiate proceedings for perjury against the respondent-wife for allegedly making false statements in her affidavit regarding her income and employment status. The Court below rejected the application as premature, reserving liberty for the petitioner to file it subsequently. However, the High Court found that the rejection was unjustified as there was a specific finding of falsity in the respondent's statement, supported by undisputed Income Tax Returns. The Court emphasized that the consideration of a perjury application should not be linked to the outcome of the main matter, citing the need for effective action against perjury.

2. Initiation of Perjury Action During Police Investigation: The respondent's counsel argued that action for perjury cannot be taken until the completion of a police investigation against the petitioner for producing documents. However, the High Court disagreed, stating that the authenticity of the documents was not disputed, and the police investigation did not affect the perjury allegations. The Court stressed that the seriousness of perjury as a heinous offense required timely and effective action to prevent the pollution of the justice system.

3. Interpretation of Apex Court Decisions: The High Court analyzed the Apex Court decisions in B.K. Gupta vs. Damodar H. Bajaj and Mahila Vinod Kumari vs. State of Madhya Pradesh in the context of perjury. It emphasized the need for Courts to use provisions effectively to combat perjury and highlighted the gravity of false evidence in judicial proceedings. The Court criticized the lower court for not giving due seriousness to the perjury application, stressing the importance of preserving the sanctity of judicial proceedings.

4. Seriousness of Perjury and Need for Effective Action: The High Court underscored the seriousness of perjury as a grave offense that undermines the judicial system. It referenced historical criticism of perjury in Indian Courts and highlighted the importance of taking stern action against false evidence. The Court emphasized the need for Courts to act promptly and decisively against perjury to maintain the integrity of judicial proceedings.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration. The Court emphasized the importance of addressing perjury allegations promptly and on merit to send a strong message against false evidence in judicial proceedings.