Ensuring nothing but the truth

Perjury laws in India need to be stringently enforced. In a growing number of cases witnesses are turning hostile and stating exactly the opposite of what they had earlier stated before the police, and sometimes even before the magistrate. The recent evidence of perjury in BMW hit-and-run case is illustrative of this sorry state of affairs. Perjury is the crime of making false statements under oath, a crime that is getting increasingly common because there is very little danger of getting punished. There is a Kannada saying: One can speak the truth since one is not speaking before a court of law!

Hard data on the incidence of perjury in India is difficult to get, and prosecutions are few and far between. The Malimath Committee (2003), in its report on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System, dealt with various aspects of the problem. The report enumerated the difficulties and inconvenience encountered by witnesses in our courts. In most courts there is no designated place with proper arrangements for the witnesses. It is also true that they are treated with scant respect. Cases drag on interminably with frequent adjournments and witnesses are put to immense difficulties. The feeling then grows, especially among ordinary people with limited means, that to get embroiled as a witness is like being caught like a fish on very long line. There is also the belief that the individual has no duty to assist the police in criminal matters and that the prevention and investigation of crime is the sole responsibility of the police.

Perjury, as we have seen in cases like the Jessica Lal murder, can seriously subvert the course of justice, even while the perjurer is allowed to get away with impunity. As far as the law is concerned, there is no lacuna. Perjury is a penal offence under sections 193 to 195 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 195 (b) of Criminal Procedure Code prescribes that no court shall take cognisance of perjury under section 193 to 195 IPC except on the complaint in writing of the court. But the procedure is somewhat convoluted and long-drawn. Section 344 CrPC, however, provides an alternative summary procedure empowering the court of sessions or magistrate to try the witness summarily and sentence the perjurer to imprisonment, which may extend up to three months or a fine of Rs 500 or with both. But the provision is seldom resorted to by the courts. Indeed, the response of the courts in dealing with the serious problem of perjury has bordered on indifference.

... contd.

Ads By Google

Message*	Maximum characters allowed

Name*		Email ID*
Subject*		Country*

TERMS OF USE:
The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).

I agree to the terms of use.

Mail this page