Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants Sri Mohammed Tahir submits that the respondents have fabricated the witness statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., and subsequently produced before the Court along with the charge sheet. These fabricated statements differ from the original version recorded by the State police and handed over to the NIA on 19.08.2022. Learned NC: 2025:KHC:17619-DB counsel submits that since the statements are altered and are used in judicial proceedings, the bar under Section 195 (1) (b)(ii) Cr.P.C. is attracted. To safeguard the sanctity of judicial process, the complainant / appellants have rightly filed an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

requesting the Court to conduct a preliminary enquiry and file a complaint against the concerned respondents for the offences affecting the administration of justice. It is further argued that the appellants are not seeking to establish the guilt of the respondents at this stage, but are only invoking the Courts' statutory power to act when its process is being abused through forged documents.

Learned counsel places reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Iqbal Singh Marwah and another vs. Meenakshi Marwah and another1 (Iqbal Singh Marwah) to contend that if the offence of forgery is committed with the intent to use the forged document in the Court proceedings, the Court's sanction under Section 195 Cr.P.C. is required and in the instant case, the (2005) 4 SCC 370 NC: 2025:KHC:17619-DB fabricated witnesses statements were used to influence the judicial mind during the stage of taking cognizance and trial proceedings. There are justifiable reasons to invoke Section 340 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel argues that allowing the use of fabricated witnesses' statements in judicial proceedings strikes at the heart of judicial integrity. It is not merely a procedural lapse but an act of interference in the administration of justice - one that must be dealt with sternly by initiating action under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

NC: 2025:KHC:17619-DB "Whether the allegation of the petitioners/appellants that the respondents during the investigation of the case fabricated the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and presented them in the Court with the charge sheet can be considered as fabricated within the offences enumerated in Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. necessitating the prosecution under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.?"

Therefore, it is well settled law that the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are part of the investigative process, as such, they are not considered as

- 34 -

NC: 2025:KHC:17619-DB evidence unless used for contradiction during trial as per Section 145 of the Act, 1872. For the document to attract prosecution under Sections 463 and 471 of IPC, it has to be shown that the document is fabricated with an intent to deceive and has been used as genuine in judicial proceedings. According to the Apex Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah's case the bar under Section 195 (1) (b) (ii) applies only when a forged document is created for use in Court or is actually used in evidence during a judicial proceedings. Whether the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C is forged / fabricated or not is a matter of trial and for the Section 195 (1) (b) (ii) to apply and a complaint under Section 340 Cr.P.C. would become necessary only if it is proved that the 161 statement so produced is forged / fabricated and mere allegation that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is fabricated by itself does not attract Section 195 (1) (b) (ii).