Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.18 seconds)
K. Narayanaswami Reddiar vs T. Kolandaivelu Chettiar And Anr. on 24 September, 1969 cites

C.P. Kasi Thevar vs Chinniah Konar on 30 June, 1959

3. The Magistrate, who tried this case, had all the materials before him, when he passed the order of discharge under Section 253 (1). Criminal P. C. Obviously, he did not consider it necessary or expedient to launch proceedings against the respondents for preferring any false complaint or for perjury. Where after the judgment documents, which would establish the falisty of the evidence of the witness, are brought to the notice of the Court, Section 479-A. Criminal P. C. will not apply and sub-section (6) of the section will not operate as a bar for proceeding under Sections 476 to 479. Criminal P. C. Vide Kasi Thevar v. Chinniah Konar, and Kuppa Goundan v. M. S. P. Rajesh. . No material was placed subsequently by the appellant to show that the complaint which was filed, was false or the evidence, which was Riven amounted to perjury. The materials were there even at the time when the learned Magistrate passed the order of discharge. Petitioner does not base his claim for launching proceedings against the respondents on any new material, but only on the materials available from the evidence of P. W. 1 and P. W. 2 and the documents already filed. Therefore, in these circumstances, the bar under Section 479-A, Clause. 6, Criminal P. C. would come into operation.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Kuppa Goundan & Anr vs M.S.P. Rajesh on 5 May, 1966

3. The Magistrate, who tried this case, had all the materials before him, when he passed the order of discharge under Section 253 (1). Criminal P. C. Obviously, he did not consider it necessary or expedient to launch proceedings against the respondents for preferring any false complaint or for perjury. Where after the judgment documents, which would establish the falisty of the evidence of the witness, are brought to the notice of the Court, Section 479-A. Criminal P. C. will not apply and sub-section (6) of the section will not operate as a bar for proceeding under Sections 476 to 479. Criminal P. C. Vide Kasi Thevar v. Chinniah Konar, and Kuppa Goundan v. M. S. P. Rajesh. . No material was placed subsequently by the appellant to show that the complaint which was filed, was false or the evidence, which was Riven amounted to perjury. The materials were there even at the time when the learned Magistrate passed the order of discharge. Petitioner does not base his claim for launching proceedings against the respondents on any new material, but only on the materials available from the evidence of P. W. 1 and P. W. 2 and the documents already filed. Therefore, in these circumstances, the bar under Section 479-A, Clause. 6, Criminal P. C. would come into operation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

Rangaswami Reddiar vs Gunnammal on 19 August, 1965

The Courts do not often pronounce on the falsity of evidence when coming to findings. If prosecution has to be launched in every case, and particularly at the instance of the opposite party, then there will be no limit to litigation between the parties. This aspect of the matter must make the Court pause and consider the expediency of prosecution in a particular case with reference to its facts and not launch prosecution at the instance of parties in every case where perjury is discovered." Vide Rangaswamy Reddiar v. Gunnammal. The learned Magistrate has correctly dismissed the petition stating that there was not sufficient ground for taking any action against the respondents. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
Madras High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1