Sidharth 03 November 2016

Case of perjury in dv act.

Dear All,

I am facing a case of DV ACT filed by my wife. ( in delhi and i am appearing as party in person)

When court was hearing the application of inteim maintenaice , ,i filed counter application of perjury under section 340 /195. ( Griound of perjury she is working and claiming herself unemployed)

And argued that perjury must be decided befor inteim maintenaince in support of my argument i submitted the judgements of SC , Delhi HC, Allahabad HC, and Calcutta HC . In all these judgement court observed that court should decide perjury before proceeding any further.

Lawyer of my wife opposed it by ground that girl is living miserable life so court should decide interim first.

Court ordered that both the application will be decided on same day.

Both the parties agreed.

But court didn't able to decide both applications on same day because of paucity of time but court decide interim and rejected the interim maintenaice by saying girl is having sufficiant means to earn so no interim maintenaince.

But after that magistrate has changed , and present magistrate is saying that i will decide the application of perjury after deciding main petition of DV act .

i argued that procedure says court should

(a) record a finding to that effect;
(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;
(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction;

But magistrate says she will follow the procedure after deciding main petition .

Please advise what to do.?

what should my point of argument if i approach session court?

Reply Follow

6 Replies

adv.bharat @ PUNE (Lawyer) 03 November 2016

Magistrate view on this point is correct defeand the case on merit.

(Guest)

Hi siddarth Please send that judgement to me.my mail I'd. Subbu99p@ gmail.com.

Sidharth 04 November 2016

Originally posted by : autohide4u
	Delhi High Court Jan 2015, Kusum Sharma vs Mahinder Kumar Sharma Read Sec. 19.16 below: If the statements made in affidavit of assets, income and expenditure are found to be incorrect, the Court shall consider its effect while fixing the maintenance. However, action under Sec 340 Cr.P.C. is ordinarily not warranted in matrimonial litigation till the decision of the main petition.

But this is when her statements of affidavit is false . I have already submitted evidence where her statements in petiton is false.

Will below mention provision will be applicable in DV Act

An application under Section 340 of Code of Criminal Procedure is filed, the Civil Manual Chapter XIX para 337 requires that it should be registered as Miscellaneous Judicial Case

Sidharth 07 November 2016

Dear All,

Thanks to all you for your time.

After reading suggestions from all of you . I am thinking not to appeal in Session court.

The present stage of the case is

She has filed evidence by the way of affidavit and evidence is only two copies of complaint given to police station nothing else.

Now court has given next date to cross examin her.

So will it be ok if i cross examin her and after that court will pronounce its judgement ? ( or any other stage is pending before judgement)

and court has already written in her order on previous date that the application of perjury will be decided after main petition

Sidharth 08 November 2016

You are right,

Once i had an argument with this magistrate as she is very rude towards men,then on last hearing she adviced me to have conversation with my wife,

I replied " As you yourself told me that this case is criminal case, you either declare me guilty or innocent, if you want me to have compromise with a so called victim give me the orders for that"