Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two criminal appeals filed by Manoj Nivruttirao Chavan and Dr. Gokul Hariprasad Agrawal against their conviction under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for giving false evidence. The appellants were witnesses in Sessions Case No. 90/1996, where they were examined as P.W.4 and P.W.3 respectively. In that sessions case, the accused were charged with offenses arising from an incident on 9.2.1996, where one Rajkumar and Kisan Ganpati were injured, and Kisan died. The prosecution alleged that the accused reached a Dhaba in a Tata Sumo and, after an altercation, inflicted knife blows. However, almost all witnesses, including the appellants, turned hostile, leading the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, to acquit all accused on 24.3.2003 on the ground of 'No Evidence'. Subsequently, the trial court initiated proceedings against the appellants for perjury and convicted them under Section 193 IPC. The High Court examined the appeals and found that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellants had deliberately given false evidence. The court noted that witnesses turning hostile is not uncommon and does not automatically amount to perjury. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish that the witness knowingly made a false statement. In the absence of such evidence, the convictions could not be sustained. The High Court allowed both appeals, set aside the convictions, and acquitted the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Perjury - Section 193 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Hostile Witness - The appellants were witnesses in a sessions case who turned hostile, leading to acquittal of accused due to no evidence. The trial court convicted them under Section 193 IPC for giving false evidence. The High Court held that mere turning hostile does not automatically constitute perjury; there must be clear evidence of deliberate falsehood. Since the prosecution failed to prove that the witnesses intentionally gave false testimony, the convictions were set aside. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Hostile Witness - Effect of Turning Hostile - The court observed that witnesses turning hostile is not uncommon and does not by itself establish perjury. The burden lies on the prosecution to show that the witness knowingly made a false statement. In the absence of such proof, the presumption of innocence prevails. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants, who turned hostile as witnesses in a sessions case, are guilty of perjury under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, when the sessions court had acquitted the accused due to no evidence.
Final Decision
Both appeals allowed. Convictions under Section 193 IPC set aside. Appellants acquitted.
Law Points
- Perjury
- Section 193 IPC
- Hostile witness
- No evidence
- Acquittal
- Witness protection
