AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The impugned show cause notice is in effect founded upon the following observations made by the learned Special Judge, Anti corruption, in the
final judgment, namely:
Keeping in view the above observation the witness has not honoured the oath given to him before this court and he has deliberately resiled and given a false statement that he was coached to state by the Dy. S. P. what he has stated on oath without any complaint. I feel the witness has resiled and given a false statement against oath in such a manner that he needs to be prosecuted on the points discussed deposed by him falsely
despite oath.
The requirements of Section 479 (a) Cr. P. C. are that the witness has given false evidence and that the falsity is conscious and deliberate and,
moreover, that it is proper and expedient in order to eradicate the evils of perjury to prosecute the witness for committing perjury. The court is required to give a finding in this behalf before proceeding to issue any show cause notice to the witness. In the present case, observations of the learned Special Judge, quoted above, do not fulfill these requirements. The learned Judge has made the contradiction in the statement as a basis of show cause notice without giving any finding as to which part of the statement was false, muchless, that such falsity was deliberate and conscious.
All that he has found is that the witness has resiled from his previous statement and that the explanation given by him that he was tutored by the Dy.
Sp. is false. On these premise!, the show cause notice cannot be upheld as a valid notice in law The show cause notice must, therefore, be set aside and I hereby do so.
The revision petition is disposed of accordingly.