deepak 08 July 2016

Sec. 340 crpc for purjury.

Respected Experts,

I filed application u/s. 340 Cr.Pc. against my wife who given contradictory as well as false, misleading statement in affidavit i.e. on Oath. This is emerged in her cross.

Now I have been told by few advocates that every false statement is not comes under 340 Cr.PC. and chances for conviction is very low.

My say is Law doesn't differenciate whether false statement given on Oath i.e. affidavit should be relevent or not. It clearly speaks about 'False'.

Kindly guide me.

Reply Follow

8 Replies

YOGESHWAR. (ADVOCATE HIGH COURT-criminal /civil -youract@gmail.com) 08 July 2016

You are technically right only.

For filing PERJURY you need legal help which will take time and money.

And merely filing is not enough you have to persue the case which will take years.

Other disadvantage is any expert advocate will first cross your evidence and can trap you in similar and many other mistakes. mistakes.

RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE (LAWYER AT BUDHIRAJA & ASSOCIATES SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) 08 July 2016

U R ON RIGHT LINE...GO AHEAD....BUT U HAVE TO WORK HARD

deepak 08 July 2016

Thanks Experts for ur Valued opinions. @ Rakhi ji kindly elaborate what hard work is expected. I mean After the cross false statements are clearly exposed. Which is on record. Except to bring into the notice of court, what is expected.

deepak 08 July 2016

Distressgirlfreinds (minister) 09 July 2016

1.In Supreme Court of India

M/s Sciemed Overseas Inc. ….Petitioner

Versus

BOC India Limited &Ors. …Respondents

Go through this judgement ...for perjury ...i know a good lawyer who has won cases in perjury

drop .mail in distressgirlfreinds2014@gmail.com if u need help

Vibha 09 July 2016

Your lawyer is correct that every false statement does not attract CrPC 340.
Three ingredients need to be proven for CrPC 340:
1. False statement was made under oath
2. Person knew that his statement was false when he made it
3. Person willfully made such false statement with mala fide intent (mens rea)
Contradictory statements prove only (1). Many other questions will come into play while proving the remaining ingredients.

Vibha 09 July 2016

If the lie was about some minor detail, it is easy to argue lapse in memory.
If the lie was something immaterial to the reliefs or case at hand then its easy to argue that there was no mala fide intent because she would gain nothing by such false statement.
I hope this gives you an idea for why proving the other ingredients of perjury is not trivial.

Vibha 09 July 2016

I agree with Mr Reddi that court has to decide whether to pursue the case. But if queryist presents a convincing case then judge cannot refuse to pursue. Discretionary power of judge is limited to establishing prima facie case and a reasonable probability of conviction.