2 min readMumbaiMar 12, 2018 05:24 AM IST
First published on: Mar 12, 2018 at 05:24 AM IST
The father’s lawyer told the court, “On the basis of the absolutely false and highly defamatory statement, thereby misleading this court, (husband) succeeded to get interim protection.” (Source: Express Archive)
UPON discovering that a man lied to the court about his wife having an affair, the Bombay High Court recently ordered an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate into the man’s claims. The father of the 20-year-old woman had filed a petition, saying his daughter’s husband had sought interim relief last year in an anticipatory bail application before the HC by lying about his daughter having an affair. The father’s lawyer told the court, “On the basis of the absolutely false and highly defamatory statement, thereby misleading this court, (husband) succeeded to get interim protection.”
The husband had sought anticipatory bail from the high court, after his application was rejected by a sessions court, in a case of rape, unnatural offence, subjecting his wife to cruelty, criminal intimidation and harassment for dowry filed by the wife at the Mahim police station. However, his anticipatory bail was rejected by the high court.
On the basis of a reply from the investigating officer, saying the man’s claims about his wife’s illicit affair were false, Justice A S Gadkari observed, “…making false statement before this court, contrary to the record and for not disclosing true and correct facts is made out. This court is of the prima facie opinion that an offence as contemplated under Sections 193(false evidence), 196 (using evidence know to be false), 199 (false statement made in declaration which is by law receivable as evidence), 200 (using as true such declaration knowing it to be false) and 209 (dishonestly making false claim in court) of the Indian Penal Code appears to have been committed by the Respondent No. 2 (husband) and it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry be made into it by a Judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction.”
The father’s lawyer told the court, “On the basis of the absolutely false and highly defamatory statement, thereby misleading this court, (husband) succeeded to get interim protection.” (Source: Express Archive)
Share
