State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Dr. Kuldeep Dhawan & Others

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Dr. Kuldeep Dhawan & Others

Description

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 195,196,467,471 and 120BForgeryUsing forged documents as genuineProducing false evidence before the CourtPerjuryAppeal against acquittalScope of interference

HeldIn exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittalFurther heldPerjury is a concomitant of a court of law, the question always being one of degreeEvery incorrect or false statement does not make it incumbent on the court to order prosecutionThe provisions of Section 340 are more or less proceduralBefore directing a complaint to be lodged the court must form an opinion on being satisfied and come to the conclusion on such satisfaction that the person charged has intentionally given false evidence and that for the eradication of the evils of perjury and in the interest of justice, it is expedient that he should be prosecuted- Court below has not complied with the mandatory provisions of Section 340 of the Code and filed the complaint while passing the order dated 29.09.2006 without the requisite satisfactionTrial Court has rightly acquitted the accusedNo merit in the appealAppeal dismissed. (Paras 14, 25 and 34)

Published on
28 February 2025
Last Updated Date
09-05-2025
File Size
279.74 KB
File Type
application/pdf
Hits
24 Hits
You do not have permission to download this document
Please contact admin to get permission.
×