The State Of Kerala vs Govindaswamy on 11 November, 2011
Author: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
that he was then telling untruth knowing
fully of its falsehood. Evidently, the specific portions of his
evidence during his examination
since
21.12.1994. Though it was suggested that the said allegation is a falsehood,
Ext.P4 would belie the defence contention and support the evidence
according to the lower appellate court had no reason to
speak falsehood and his evidence stands unimpeached. He
had spoken about the agreement of sale
scope of
inquiry is limited to ascertainment of the truth or falsehood of the
allegations made in the complaint and whether a prima facie case
having identified them is nothing but falsehood. A1 to A3 have
been implicated only because they are active members of the
Marxist Party
drawer
of his table is found to be a tissue of falsehood in the light of
the unimpeachable evidence referred to earlier. That
argument addressed
drawer
of his table is found to be a tissue of falsehood in the light of
the unimpeachable evidence referred to earlier. That
argument addressed
finding as to the existence of a prima facie case and
deliberate falsehood on a matter of substance, reasonable
foundation for the charge and above
that a person, who's case is based on falsehood,
has no right to approach the court. He can be
summarily thrown