Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by James Kunjwal against the order of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, which, while dismissing a bail cancellation application, directed the Registrar (Judicial) to file a complaint against the appellant for allegedly filing a false affidavit under Section 193 IPC. The background of the case involves an FIR registered against the appellant under Sections 376 and 504 IPC by the second respondent (complainant) on allegations of establishing relations on the false pretext of marriage. The appellant was granted bail by the High Court on 8 June 2021. The complainant sought cancellation of bail, alleging that the appellant continued to harass her, including through WhatsApp messages and Instagram statuses, and that he had made contradictory statements. In response, the appellant filed an affidavit denying the allegations, stating that no such incidents occurred and that the complainant was misusing the process. The High Court, while dismissing the bail cancellation application, observed that the appellant had intentionally filed a false affidavit and directed the Registrar to file a complaint under Section 193 IPC. Consequently, a criminal complaint was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital. The appellant challenged this direction before the Supreme Court, arguing that mere denial of averments does not constitute perjury and that the court is not bound to make a complaint unless it is expedient in the interest of justice, relying on the Constitution Bench judgment in Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah. The Supreme Court examined the definitions of false evidence under Sections 191 and 193 IPC and the procedure under Section 195(1)(b) CrPC. The Court held that the appellant's affidavit merely denied the complainant's allegations and did not make any positive false statement. A mere denial of facts, without more, does not amount to giving false evidence. The Court emphasized that the power to file a complaint for perjury must be exercised cautiously and only when it is clearly expedient in the interest of justice. Since the appellant's response was a simple denial, the High Court's conclusion that he intentionally filed a false affidavit was not justified. Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned direction and quashed the criminal complaint filed against the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Perjury - False Evidence - Sections 191, 193 IPC - Mere denial of allegations in an affidavit does not amount to giving false evidence - The appellant denied the complainant's allegations regarding incidents of harassment and WhatsApp messages, stating that no such events occurred and that the complainant was misusing the process - The High Court concluded that the appellant intentionally filed a false affidavit and directed the Registrar to file a complaint under Section 193 IPC - Held that a mere denial of facts, without more, does not constitute the offence of giving false evidence as defined under Section 191 IPC, as the appellant did not make any positive assertion of false facts but only refuted the complainant's version (Paras 9-13). B) Criminal Procedure - Prosecution for Perjury - Sections 195(1)(b), 340 CrPC - Court's power to file complaint for perjury must be exercised cautiously and only when it is expedient in the interest of justice - The High Court's direction to file a complaint was based on the appellant's denial of the complainant's allegations, which did not amount to a clear case of perjury - Held that the court must be satisfied that the false statement was made intentionally and that prosecution is necessary in the interest of justice, relying on the principle in Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah (2005) 4 SCC 370 (Paras 6, 12-13).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the contents of an affidavit filed before the High Court, which merely deny the averments made by the complainant, constitute an offence under Section 193 IPC read with Section 191 IPC, warranting a complaint under Section 195(1)(b) CrPC.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned direction of the High Court to file a complaint under Section 193 IPC, and quashed the criminal complaint (Criminal Complaint No.2991 of 2022) filed against the appellant.
Law Points
- Perjury
- False evidence
- Section 193 IPC
- Section 191 IPC
- Section 195 CrPC
- Section 340 CrPC
- Bail cancellation
- Affidavit
- Complaint by court
- Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah
