Perjury application

Summarize them to the points.

Summarize them to the points.

Thank you ,

I am preparing both versions ( detailed and a summary).  As an example,  Instead of saying " Person A in his/her Chief examination on _____ , Page __, Para ___, stated that .... Person A in his/her Cross on ___, Page___, Para___ stated that .....",

I would just say 

 " PW-3 throughout his examination, makes several statements that he gave jewellery , cash to someone and others. He states that ‘he doesn’t have bills but also states he didn’t give bills of because bills were in locker’ - signifying that he does have the bills. Statements are contradictory and irreconcilable - he cant "not have bills" and "have bills".

Hope the above is ok. 

thanks

harsh

Yes this is OK.

thank you so much ! Easy to quickly draft the whole damn thing now !

Thanks

Harsh

Originally posted by : Harsh
	Thank you , I am preparing both versions ( detailed and a summary).  As an example,  Instead of saying " Person A in his/her Chief examination on _____ , Page __, Para ___, stated that .... Person A in his/her Cross on ___, Page___, Para___ stated that .....", I would just say   " PW-3 throughout his examination, makes several statements that he gave jewellery , cash to someone and others. He states that ‘he doesn’t have bills but also states he didn’t give bills of because bills were in locker’ - signifying that he does have the bills. Statements are contradictory and irreconcilable - he cant "not have bills" and "have bills". Hope the above is ok.  thanks harsh

Firstly it is rightly suggested that this is not perjury.

Secondly why do you want to make your case complicated. If no bill is on the record that goes in your favour, It doesn't matter whether the bill is in the locker or anyother reason.

Sir, Both are on oath, two persons making completely contradictory irreconcilable statements , both can't be true , and both have a direct impact on accused, what would the court believe? 

A deposes B was present and a witness to the crime by C

B deposes he was not present and has no idea of the crime committed by C

If benefit of doubt given to accused, A is lying.

w/o benefit of doubt also, court still can't  decide that C is guilty as B is denying the fact  assuming no other evidence exists.

since both A and B are deposing in full consciousness, one of them must be lying?perjury?

Sachin sir , totally agree not to make things complicated, but if opp. Party is not budging, some offensive is needed, also jaisi karni Vaisi Bharti, my own advocate wants to go offensive! 

Also , I thought any wilful and conscious act of misleading , misguiding, lying on oath constitutes perjury.  Two statements totally opposite to each other, on oath, certainly give away a lie, as both can't be true but one of them must be true. If both are made by same person, it's direct perjury as per some reading I did. But if they are made by two different persons,  then I not sure as I didn't find any references.

Trivedi sir, thanks f, it is indeed quite authoritative and answers a lot of questions.

As long as the 'lie' is intentional it is perjury. However innocent misrepresentations (lack of memory etc.) can be corrected immediately. 

As per below,  court may not find it expedient to prosecute just for 2 contradictory statements,  but if it does, then it will result in conviction. But my question still remains - when these statements are made by 2 DIFFERENT witnesses.

Scenario: A says -  "B is a family friend of A  and is an eyewitness to a crime committed by C and is also a witness in this case".   B says - " he is a family friend of A, but he is not an  eye witness and has no idea about the crime at all".  Clearly, one of them is lying. And logically speaking, it is A who is lying to strengthen his case against C. B being a friend of A, would not support C but also doesnt want to be a false witness.

Since the evidence of A and B has a direct bearing on C's fate, the contradiction must be handled. But how in this case ? (not just unable to prove, someone must take the responsibility for lying, otherwise its a miscarriage).

There are authorities, which will be mentioned later holding that when a witness admits having made a previous statement incorrectly and corrects himself later, it is not expedient to prosecute him for perjury. When, however, a witness makes two contradictory statements intentionally, there is nothing to show that the earlier statement was wrong and was corrected by the subsequent statement and he does not admit that he had committed a mistake in making the earlier statement and when the prosecution charges him in the alternative with making one of the two statements falsely, he must be convicted of perjury. 

All,

I was told that my application will be considered later. If I find  proof of additional false evidence material to the case, can I submit additional grounds? Should that be done in same court, and can it be done after current case is over? Or, if current application is admitted and sent to a jfmc court, can I submit addl. grounds there?  

Please suggest.