Something important for harassed ones


1) perjury application has to be decided SEPARATELY (i.e. neither first nor at the last)

ruling - 

(a) Kenneth Desa s/o Late John Desa vs Gopal s/o Leeladhar Narang, (Bombay HC)

provisions - civil manual chapter 19 & criminal manual chapter xxx

perjury application has to be decided SEPARATELY.


it can NOT be decided along with the main case - may be civil / criminal.


i wonder how the provisions of civil manual chapter 19 and criminal manual chapter xxx are ignored frequently.

2) application u/s crpc 340 + 195 is NOT the ONLY remedy

ruling - 

(a) A. R. Antulay vs Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak And Another on 16 February, 1984 - SC

(b) Shriram Krishnappa Asegaonkar vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr. on 24 July, 1986 - Bombay HC

if one is caught in the offense of perjury, crpc 340 + 195 is NOT the ONLY remedy.


private complaint u/s IPC 417 can be filed SEPARATELY for cheating the hon. court


so anybody can set criminal law in motion r/w the provisions of crpc. 195 to 199.

3) ipc 211 private complaint can be filed WITHOUT WAITING if someone gives false complaint against you

ruling - 

(a) M. L. Sethi vs R. P. Kapur & Anr on 23 September, 1966 - SC

BEFORE concluding the false 498a case, husband can file ipc 211 against wife if she files FALSE 498a

and apart from 498a, this is applicable to ALL the sections of the IPC .


no need to wait till court gives final verdict in 498a case.


only care to be taken is -


* private complaint u/s ipc 211 has to be filed BEFORE police files charge sheet in court u/s crpc 173

private complaint u/s ipc 211 has to be filed BEFORE u approach any court for Anticipatory Bail.

read very carefully & understand - imp. points highlighted in attachments



Attached File : 759862629 civil manual - chapter19.pdf, 759862629 criminal manual - xxx.pdf, 759862629 kenneth desa - m.j. case.pdf downloaded 258 times

Total likes : 1 times


rulings for point no. 1 are provided above

rulings for point no. 2 are as follows :



Attached File : 759862629 1) a. r. antulay vs ramdas sriniwas nayak and another on 16 february, 1984 - locus standi.pdf, 759862629 2) shriram krishnappa asegaonkar vs state of maharashtra and anr. on 24 july, 1986.pdf downloaded 212 times


rulings for point no. 3 are as follows :



Attached File : 759862629 3) m. l. sethi vs r. p. kapur & anr on 23 september, 1966 - 211 can be filed.pdf downloaded 105 times

Supreme Court of India

Abdul Rehman & Ors vs K.M.Anees-Ul-Haq on 14 November, 2011


Once it is held that bail proceedings amounted to judicial proceedings the same being anterior in point of time to the taking of cognizance by the Metropolitan Magistrate, there is no escape from the conclusion that any offence punishable under Section 211 IPC could be taken cognizance of only at the instance of the Court in relation to whose proceedings the same was committed or who finally dealt with that case.




u can file IPC 211 - BEFORE u apply for AB (i.e. BEFORE the matter goes to any court.)

this is a good counter against a false 498a.

i wonder, how come nobody is interested in this thread !!


highlighted pdf file : 

Attached File : 968962493 4) abdul rehman & ors vs k.m.anees-ul-haq on 14 november, 2011 - 211.pdf downloaded 102 times

hi amit good work. i will definetly share my experience/views once i go through all case laws. any ways great job.


Before filing of 498 a i had filed RCR and also informed the police that MISUSE OF LAW can be done by wife and inlaws. (Treated as GD)

She filed 498 a. All got AB except me from lower court.

i got AB from High court.

Charge Sheet submitted . Copy not received yet.

What shud i do now?



what is the relevance of ur post here ??


Hi Amit,

Can u share your email id. I have a query can i send it personally to you. 

Worker 9822085506



Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Search Forum:


  LAWyersclubindia Menu