w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Rajkumar Pathak v/s Laxman @ Krishan Dutt Tiwari & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- PATHAK CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74110MH2008PTC182357

Company & Directors' Information:- LAXMAN PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U31300RJ1974PTC001554

Company & Directors' Information:- TIWARI PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U34105UP1952PTC002459

Company & Directors' Information:- N DUTT & CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U65993WB1924PTC004901

    M.Cr.C. No. 8849 of 2016

    Decided On, 17 July 2018

    At, High Court of Madhya Pradesh

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY

    For the Applicant: Niranjan Pathak, Advocate. For the Respondents: Arpit Kumar Tiwari, Advocate.



Judgment Text

1. This petition has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 r/w 340 of CrPC for taking action against the respondent for making false declaration and filing false affidavit before this Court in M.Cr.C.No.3429/2016.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the report of applicant police registered Crime No.1322/2015 at P.S. Garha for the offence punishable under Section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the Respondent and co-accused Ghanshyam Tiwari, Smt. Deepa Tiwari, Ajay Tiwari and Pankaj Tiwari. Respondent had filed an application under Section 438 of CrPC before this court for getting anticipatory bail in the crime, which was registered as M.Cr.C.No.3429/2016 and disposed of by this court vide order dated 23/02/16. In that application, respondent stated that to the best of his knowledge no application for bail has been filed by the coaccused persons and also filed an affidavit in support of his application. While the respondent is real brother of Smt. Deepa Tiwari and maternal uncle of Pankaj Tiwari. Respondent even has also claimed parity for getting the similar benefit as extended to other co-accused by this Court while disposing of the bail application filed by them, therefore, it is very much clear that the respondent was aware about the filing and disposing of the bail application of other co-accused of the crime before this court and inspite of having knowledge of this fact respondent deliberately made false declaration on affidavit before this Court that he has no knowledge for filing of bail by the co-accused persons of the crime.

3. Likewise respondent stated in his application that he has no nickname as Laxman Tiwari whereas it is very much clear from the perusal of the bail application filed by the other co-accused person namely Ghanshyam Tiwari and Smt. Deepa Tiwari that applicant has nickname as Laxman Tiwari. Therefore, it is very much clear that the respondent has made false statement on oath by filing an affidavit before this Court. So cognizance of offence punishable under Sections 191, 192, 193 & 420 of IPC be taken against him. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on the Apex Court judgment passed in the case of Sciemed Overseas Inc. v. BOC India Limited and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 70 and the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Delton Impex Pvt. Ltd. Katni v. Sanjay Dang and others reported in 2009 (2) MPLJ (Cri.) 13.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and submitted that the respondent did not deliberately made false declaration in his application. Respondent had only stated in his application that 'to the best of my knowledge, no bail application is filed by the co-accused'. There is no evidence on record to show that at the time of filing of the bail application respondent had had the knowledge that co-accused of the crime i.e. Ghanshyam Tiwari and Smt. Deepa Tiwari have already filed their bail application before this court. So no offence is made out against the respondent and prayed for rejection of the application.

5. This Court has gone through the record and arguments put forth by the counsel for both the parties. It appears from the record that Ghanshyam Tiwari and Smt. Deepa Tiwari co-accused of the crime No.1322/2015 registered at P.S. Garha district Jabalpur filed the bail application M.Cr.C.No.94/2016 before this court on 02/01/16 which was disposed of by this court by the order dated 27/01/16 thereafter applicant who is the brother of the co-accused Smt. Deepa Tiwari filed his bail application before this court on 17/02/16 and even during arguments of the application counsel of the respondent claimed parity for getting the similar benefit as extended to co-accused Smt. Deepa Tiwari and Ghanshyam Tiwari by this Court. So it cannot be said that respondent has no knowledge regarding filing of bail application of co-accused Smt. Deepa Tiwari and Ghanshyam Tiwari before this court in the same crime at the time of filing his bail application.

6. But the declaration to the effect that whether the bail application of co-accused of the same crime is pending or disposed of by the high court or not is required to facilitate the registry of this court to list all the bail applications arising out of the same crime before same bench. It does not appear that respondent deliberately gave this false information to this court for getting any undue benefit.

7. Section 340 of the Code of criminal Procedure reads as under:-

'340. Procedure in cases mentioned in Section 195:- (1) When, upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of Justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 195, which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in that Court, or as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary,–

(a) record a finding to that effect;

(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;

(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class jurisdiction;

(d) take sufficient security for the appearance of the accused before such Magistrate or if the alleged offence is non-bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do, send the accused in custody to such Magistrate, and

(e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate.

8. On reading the provisions of Section 340 Cr.P.C. it is clear that before a direction either for an inquiry or for prosecution the Court has to form an opinion that it is "expedient in the interest of justice" that an inquiry should be made into any such offence. The meaning of the word "expedient in the interest of justice" is that forming of the opinion is a sine qua non for proceedings to launch a prosecution for perjury.

9. The facts of the cases M/s Sciemed Overseas Inc Vs BOC India Limited & Ors (supra) and Delton Impex Pvt. Ltd. Katni v. Sanjay Dang and others (supra) relied by the learned counsel of the applicant do not match with the present case. In the first case appellant knowingly filed false affidavit regarding completion of work which was not completed and on that basis high court rejected the petition and in second case respondent no. 1 to 4 in collusion with respondent no.5, obtained interim injunction from court in the suit filed by them by playing fraud with the court. While in this case respondent did not get any relief from the court on the basis of false information. So that judgement do not help applicant much.

10. On the other hand in the case of Chandrapal Singh And Ors. vs Maharaj Singh & Anr reported in AIR 1982 SC 1238, the Apex Court observed. Falsity can be alleged when truth stands out glaringly and to the knowledge of the person who is making the false statement. Day in and day out in courts averments made by one set of witnesses are accepted and the counter averments are rejected. If in all such cases complaints under Section 199 of IPC are to be filed not only there will open up floodgates of litigation but it would unquestionably be an abuse of the process of the Court.

11. In the case of K.T.M.S. Mohd. And Anr vs Union Of India reported in AIR 1992 SC 1831 the Apex Court has also held that it is incumbent that the power given by Section 340 of the Code should be used with utmost care and after due consideration. Such a prosecution for perjury should be taken only if it is expedient in the interest of justice.

12. In the case of Iqbal Singh Marwah and another Vs. Meenakshi Marwah and another reported in (2005) 4 SCC 370, the Supreme Court in para-23 of the judgement observed as under:-

'In view of the language used in Section 340 Cr.P.C. the court is not bound to make a complaint regarding commission of an offence referred to in Section 195(1)(b), as the section is conditioned by the words 'court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice'. This shows that such a course will be adopted only if the interest of justice requires and not in every case. Before filing of the complaint, the court may hold a preliminary enquiry and record a finding to the effect that it is expedient in the interests of justice that enquiry should be made into any of the offences referred to in Section 195(1) (b). This expediency will normally be judged by the court by weighing not the magnitude of injury suffered by the person affected by such forgery or forged document, but having regard to the effect or impact, such commission of offence has upon administration of justice. It is possible that such forged document or forgery may cause a very serious or substantial injury to a person in the sense that it may deprive him of a very valuable property or status or the like, but such document may be just a piece of evidence produced or given in evidence in court, where voluminous evidence may have been adduced and the effect of such piece of evidence on the broad concept of administration of justice may be minimal. In such circumstances, the court may not consider it expedient in the interest of justice to make a complaint.'

13. From the aforesaid observations of the Supreme Co

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

urt in various decisions, it emerged that every incorrect or false statement does not make it incumbent upon the Court to order prosecution, but requires the Court to exercise judicial discretion to order prosecution only in the larger interest of the administration of the justice. Falsity can be alleged when truth stands out glaringly and to the knowledge of the person who is making the false statement. Prosecution for perjury can be directed in the larger interest of the administration of justice only in case of deliberate falsehood. 14. If we consider the facts of the case which are alleged to be false, in the light of above pronouncement of the Apex Court it does not appear that allege fact is such a nature that in the larger interest of the administration of the justice prosecution for perjury should be directed. In the considered opinion of this court, it would not be expedient in the interest of justice to invoke the provisions of Section 340 of Cr.P.C. for this purpose. 15. Hence, this petition is dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

24-07-2020 Ashu Dutt Versus Aneesha Dutt High Court of Judicature at Bombay
24-07-2020 Dr. Shyam Sunder Tiwari Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Delhi
10-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Additional Secretary (Legal), New Delhi Versus Anil Laxman Matade National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-06-2020 Parasnath Tiwari Versus Senior Post Master, Post Office Head Office, Uttar Pradesh National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-06-2020 Laxman Singh Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
24-06-2020 Arvind Tiwari & Others Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
22-06-2020 Arvind Tiwari & Others Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
09-06-2020 Dharmesh Vasantrai Shah Versus Renuka Prakash Tiwari High Court of Judicature at Bombay
02-06-2020 Niraj Kumar Tiwari Versus State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Registration, Excise and Prohibition, Government of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
26-05-2020 Dr. Divyesh J. Pathak & Others Versus National Board of Examinations & Another High Court of Delhi
22-05-2020 Anant Vardhan Pathak @ Anant Satish Pathak Versus Union of India [Narcotic Control Bureau High Court of Judicature at Bombay
20-05-2020 Mohit Kumar & Another Versus Ashok Kumar Tiwari & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
30-04-2020 Pawan Prakash Pathak & Another Versus Bar Council of India & Others Supreme Court of India
27-04-2020 Dr. Devyesh J. Pathak & Others Versus National Board of Examination & Others High Court of Delhi
17-03-2020 Shree Ram Tiwari Versus State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, Jharkhand & Others High Court of Jharkhand
04-03-2020 Kishor Laxman Lonari, Convict No. C/52 Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Prison – 3, State of Maharashtra, Home Department, Mantralaya In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
02-03-2020 Dharmendra Tiwari Versus Rashmi Tiwari High Court of Madhya Pradesh
17-02-2020 State of Maharashtra Versus Dr. Umakant Laxman Biraris & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-02-2020 Sanjay Kumar Tiwari & Others Versus Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
11-02-2020 Laxman J. Chavan & Others Versus The Chief Secretary, State of Goa & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-02-2020 Laxman Gangaram Dodmani & Another Versus State of Goa, Through Chief Secretary & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-02-2020 Axis Bank V/S Shyambeer Nath Tiwari and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Delhi
10-02-2020 The State of Maharashtra Versus Ashok Suresh Laxman Babar Sainagar Zopadpatti & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
07-02-2020 Kalindi Damodar Garde (D) By Lrs. Versus Manohar Laxman Kulkarni & Others Supreme Court of India
06-02-2020 Navshakti Educational Society Versus Laxman Public School & Others High Court of Delhi
03-02-2020 Vithal Tanku Kolim since deceased, through his legal heirs & representatives: & Others Versus Laxman Gotu Attarde, since deceased, through his LRs: & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
31-01-2020 L&T Finance Ltd. Versus Manoj Pathak & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
31-01-2020 The State of Maharashtra Versus Laxman Kashinath Ghuge & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
28-01-2020 Sujit Tiwari Versus State of Gujarat & Another Supreme Court of India
22-01-2020 Dal Pathak Versus State of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
14-01-2020 Ashok Kumar Tiwari Versus State Of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
10-01-2020 Harendra Ramchandra Pathak Versus Rajendra Ratan Mhatre High Court of Judicature at Bombay
06-01-2020 Laxman A Tekwani Versus Ganesh & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-01-2020 Chandrika Prashad Tiwari Versus Delhi Bhartiya Chikitsa Parishad & Another High Court of Delhi
02-01-2020 Arun Pathak Versus Gyani Hajrat Singh (Dead) & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
02-01-2020 H.P. Housing & Urban Development Authority Versus Som Dutt Vasudeva Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla
05-12-2019 Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Others Versus Vilas Laxman Bangar & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-11-2019 Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. Versus Niki Tiwari High Court of Chhattisgarh
25-11-2019 Ajay Tiwari Versus University of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
08-11-2019 Laxman Balu Deualkar Versus The Chief Executive Officer Kolhapur District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-11-2019 Mukut Pathak and Others V/S Union of India and Others. High Court of Delhi
01-11-2019 Kamal Navin Chandra Modi & Another Versus R.T. Construction Prop. Rabi Tiwari & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
22-10-2019 Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Through It's Authorized Signatory Versus Laxman Manik Jadhav & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
18-10-2019 Union of India & Others Versus Shishir Dutt High Court of Delhi
03-10-2019 Apoorva Pathak Versus The Honourable High Court of M.P. & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh
30-09-2019 Jai Narain Tiwari Versus U.O.I. Thru. G.M. North Eastern Railway Gorakhpur & Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
27-09-2019 Dr. Pawan Kumar Tiwari Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
26-09-2019 Nirankar Pathak & Others Versus Sri Ashish Goel, Posted As Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
23-09-2019 Parushuram Laxman Biraj Since Deceased by his Lrs Shankar Parushuram Biraj Versus State of Karnataka, Revenue Department by its Secretary High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
23-09-2019 Mithu Basu & Another Versus Arati Tiwari & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
17-09-2019 Dr. Vasanthi Shridhar Bangera & Others Versus Vishala Bokapatna Laxman High Court of Judicature at Bombay
16-09-2019 Sumit Narain Tiwari Versus Additional District Judge & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
13-09-2019 Anil Kumar Tiwari Versus The Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
05-09-2019 Laxman Lal Latta Versus Kamlesh Parmar & Others High Court of Rajasthan
05-09-2019 Sampoorna Nand Tiwari Versus State of Bihar High Court of Judicature at Patna
04-09-2019 Sarvesh Tiwari Versus Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. & Others National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
04-09-2019 Rajkishor Tiwari Versus State of Bihar High Court of Judicature at Patna
27-08-2019 Sangeeta Pareek Versus Veerendra Tiwari High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
27-08-2019 Chandrakant Baban Motkari & Others Versus Gotiram Laxman Motkari (D) By Lrs. & Others Supreme Court of India
27-08-2019 M/s. Deccan Charters Private Limited Versus Sarita Tiwari High Court of Delhi
21-08-2019 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Kamlesh Chandra Tiwari & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-08-2019 Gaya Prasad Tiwari Versus Allahabad Development Authority High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
19-08-2019 Shriram Laxman Bangar & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
14-08-2019 Virender Kumar Tiwari & Another Versus Bharati Axa Gen. Insurance Co. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-08-2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Laxman Das Khandelwal Supreme Court of India
08-08-2019 Laxman Prasad Versus Dharamlal & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
06-08-2019 Anand Ramachandra Chougule & Another Versus Sidarai Laxman Chougala & Others Supreme Court of India
05-08-2019 For the Petitioner: Amrendra Kumar, Md. Anisur Rahman, Md. Akram Naiyar, Advocates. For the Respondent: Anshuman, Kuber Pathak, Devesh Shankara, Advocates. High Court of Judicature at Patna
01-08-2019 Sharad Tiwari & Another Versus Oriental Bank of Commerce & Another Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Allahabad
01-08-2019 Alka Tiwari & Another Versus Oriental Bank Of Commerce & Another Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Allahabad
26-07-2019 Anand Ballabh Pathak Versus Mahendra Singh Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Dehradun
25-07-2019 Harsh Tiwari Versus State of M.P. & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwailor
24-07-2019 Aiswaya S. Dutt, Thiruvananthapuram Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Its Secretary to Government, Health & Family Welfare Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Another High Court of Kerala
24-07-2019 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. RG City Centre Local Shopping Centre, Delhi Versus Ashok Kumar Tiwari & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
10-07-2019 Laxman Arjun Kapgate & Others Versus Bhuwan & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
10-07-2019 Chanda Tiwari Versus Directorate of Social Welfare & Another High Court of Delhi
09-07-2019 Vishnu Kumar Tiwari Versus State of Uttar Pradesh Through Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat Lucknow & Another Supreme Court of India
09-07-2019 Vishnu Kumar Tiwari V/S State of Uttar Pradesh and Others. Supreme Court of India
08-07-2019 Arvind Kumar Tiwari Versus Pushpa Tiwari High Court of Chhattisgarh
08-07-2019 Dinesh Laxman Chavan Versus The State of Maharashtra & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-07-2019 Haresh Kumar Laxman Bhai & Co. & Others Versus Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Another High Court of Delhi
02-07-2019 Union of India & Others Versus Laxman Prasad High Court of Delhi
27-06-2019 Sudhakar Laxman Shewale & Another Versus Madhukar Laxman Shewale & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-06-2019 Shraddha Shastri Pathak Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
19-06-2019 Shraddha Shastri Pathak Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Raipur & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
04-06-2019 Rishi Dutt Versus State of J&K & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
29-05-2019 Dr. Prakash Singh Versus Tribeni Prasad Tiwari & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-05-2019 Guru Dutt Versus State of Himachal Pradesh High Court of Himachal Pradesh
23-05-2019 Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari Versus Kamini Tiwari High Court of Delhi
10-05-2019 PT Purnanand Tiwari Intermediate College & Others Versus Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Others High Court of Uttarakhand
10-05-2019 Rakesh Tiwari, Advocate Versus Alok Pandey, C.J.M. Supreme Court of India
10-05-2019 Shiv Kumar Tiwari Versu State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
09-05-2019 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Laxman Singh Butola Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Dehradun
08-05-2019 Laxman & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra High Court of Judicature at Bombay
06-05-2019 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Daya Shanker Tiwari & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
02-05-2019 Om Prakash Shukla, Dead Through Lrs, Vandana Shukla & Others Versus Ramkrishna Tiwari & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
30-04-2019 Dew Nath Tiwari & Others Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
29-04-2019 Ganesh Laxman Madne Versus State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
25-04-2019 Factory Manager Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. Versus Laxman Supreme Court of India
25-04-2019 Kundlik Laxman Wagaskar & Others Versus Subhadrabai Arjun Kalamkar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad