Application u/s 340 crpc.

This is an open platform and every body has his / her own agenda to give inputs.

Court battles are fought on every date, every application and every document..

Accused advocates give many admissions and when case goes against blame the court, law and procedure.

Procedure in civil cases and criminal cases is not same..  Read section 294 of CRPC again and again. If you have not objected in writting  about the documents of the complainant at first opportunity than the same are treated to be admitted  by accused.  Any objection thereafter is not allowed.

So is in the cross which is an art and comes by experience only. So many advocates instead of contradicting the complainant  or witnesses  about the pleadings in the complaint  give admissions by positive questions and there after blame others for failure.

Respected Sir,

please go through this citation,it may help you:

Equivalent Citation: AIR2005SC2119, 2005CriLJ2161, JT2005(3)SC195, (2005)4SCC370, 2005(1)UJ675(SC), 2005(1)ALD(Cri)717,118(2005)DLT329(SC),2005(3)MhLj530,2005(II)OLR(SC)102

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Decided On: 11.03.2005

Appellants: Iqbal Singh Marwah and Anr.
Vs.
Respondent: Meenakshi Marwah and Anr.

Again same problem.

Please read the citation fully, it is against all common understanding of PERJURY..

The operative part of IQBAL MARWAH CITATION  is-

In view of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that
Sachida Nand Singh has been correctly decided and the view taken therein
is the correct view.

Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. would be attracted only
when the offences enumerated in the said provision have been committed
with respect to a document after it has been produced or given in evidence in
a proceeding in any Court i.e. during the time when the document was in
custodia legis.

Respected Sir,

With due regards, As far as I understand It means if there is perjury and the remedy u/s 340 crpc is not the only remedy, in all other cases  (except  when the document was custodia legis) cognizance can be taken by competent magistrate.

Again it is your misconception about law , procedure and citations.

No court if bound to follow your view. And if you are confident go to higher court and get order in your favor.

You are complaining at various other threads  on this site regarding courts not listening to your view of citations.

So instead of complaining here go to higher court and convince the  higher  court.

Respected Sir,

With due respect to you,

You have mentioned, “And if you are confident”, I have already use word “may”, “ it may help you” what I have within my knowledge, I gave on this thread, because I also got many important things/opinions from this thread.

I am not saying that the court is bound to follow my views and court should follow my views, what  I am requesting to all the learned members of this forum including you  to know the procedure when the trial court is not following the ruling of Supreme Court and Higher court of its own state. I also request you to solve my problem, if you can at below thread and please let me know whether again it is my misconception about law , procedure and citations to request to trial court to do summary trial in the cases under section 138 of N I Act.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Not-following-supreme-court-ruling-by-presiding-judge--490156.asp

Hi Expert Friends..

I am just asking the way to file an application u/s 340, after judgement of conviction is made out and matter is under appeal in session. If it is possible than in which court it will be filled.

Why 'Iqbal Singh" citations is unnecessarily being dragged for perjury matter??

This order of hon Apex court says that if a document is forged prior to its being produced in the court, then a complaint can be lodged under S.190 CrPC kind. Its like a separate complaint case, nothing to do with original case.

Moreover the aggrieved party has the right to move an application under S.340 CrPC also to the ongoing court, that the false and fabricated evidence is moved.

So iqbal case does not dilute perjury law, it doubles up. Some gentle man is fully confused about operative and non operative part of this order. Madhu mital observation is perfectly right.

Answering to Ashish' question..

Please move an application under S.340(2) crpC with the session court, as explained in some other thread also.

Mr. Ashish,

U can file a complaint u/s 340 CrPC b4 the same Trial Court which passed judgement. 

Mr. Manoj..

Have u any supportive citation of doing same is validated ?