Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

"High Court Clarifies 'Not Every Acquittal Leads to Automatic Presumption of False Evidence'; Dismisses Petition"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 4, 2023, clarified the scope of proceedings under Section 195 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). The Court held that "not every acquittal leads to an automatic presumption of false evidence," thereby dismissing a petition that sought to overturn the lower court's decisions.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi adjudicated the case where the petitioner, Zile Singh, alleged that the respondents knowingly provided false evidence against him in a previous FIR, leading to his prosecution. He had been acquitted in the initial case and subsequently filed a complaint under Section 195 IPC against the respondents.

The petition aimed to quash the decisions of both the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar, and the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, which had dismissed the petitioner's complaint.

In the judgment, Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi opined, "A perusal of Section 195 Cr.P.C. would show that where false evidence is given in Court then, proceedings can be initiated only on the basis of a complaint in writing by that Court or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate. No proceeding can be maintained at the instance of a private individual even though he may be the person aggrieved in some manner."

The Court further stated that neither of the lower courts recorded a specific finding of false evidence being provided by the respondents. "If such a presumption was to be drawn, then, every case of acquittal in a criminal case would result in a subsequent prosecution of the complainant-party at the instance of a private individual," the Court added, emphasizing that such practices cannot be encouraged.

While upholding the judgments of the lower courts, the High Court dismissed the petition for lack of merit.

The judgment clarifies the law around Section 195 Cr.P.C., setting a precedent that may limit frivolous litigation in similar cases in the future.

Decided on: 04.09.2023

Zile Singh  vs Joginder Singh and ors. 

Latest Legal News