Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > Offences Punishable in the Same Way as Giving or Fabricating False Evidence(Ss. 196 to 200 IPC)
Any judicial decision is made on the foundation of the evidences produced before the court and it is made sure by the law makers that this very foundation is fair and true so as to deliver fair and equal justice and to assure this Sections like 191, 192 and 193 of IPC are provided for. Section 191 IPC explains the meaning of giving false evidence and Section 193 IPC explains meaning of fabricating false evidence and Section 193 provides for punishment to the offenders under Section 191 and 192 IPC.
Section 193 IPC:
Punishment for False Evidence:
Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation 1:
A trial before a Court-martial is a judicial proceeding.
Explanation 2:
An investigation directed by law preliminary to a proceeding before a Court of Justice, is a stage of a judicial proceeding, though that investigation may not take place before a Court of Justice.
Illustration:
A, in an enquiry before a Magistrate for the purpose of ascertaining whether Z ought to be committed for trial, makes on oath a statement which he knows to be false. As this enquiry is a stage of a judicial proceeding, A as given false evidence.
Explanation 3:
An investigation directed by a Court of Justice according to law, and conducted under the authority of a Court of Justice, is a stage of a judicial proceeding, though that investigation may not take place before a Court of Justice.
Illustration:
A, in an enquiry before an officer deputed by a Court of Justice to ascertain on the spot the boundaries of land, makes on oath a statement which he knows to be false. As this enquiry is a stage of a judicial proceeding, A has given false evidence.
Section 193 prescribes punishment for giving false evidence. It may be divided into parts.
The first part lays down the punishment for intentionally giving false evidence or fabricating false evidence in a judicial proceeding, where the person who gives false evidence in the judicial proceedings can get imprisonment up to 7 years and also fine. The second part deals with the punishment for intentionally giving false evidence or fabricating false evidence other than a judicial proceeding where the person has given false evidence in any other matter can get imprisonment up to 3 years and fine.
In Virindar Kumar Satyawadi v State of Punjab, 22 November, 1955 case, the Supreme Court held that when a candidate at an election makes a false declaration on solemn affirmation before a Returning Officer, the offence comes under the second part of Section 193 and not in the first part.
In Pritish v. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 1 SCC 253 case, a three- Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has even gone to the extent of holding that the proceedings under Section 340 of CrPC can be successfully invoked even without a preliminary inquiry since the whole purpose of the inquiry is only to decide whether it is expedient in the interests of justice to inquire into the offence which appears to have been committed.
In K.T.M.S.Mohd. vs. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 1831 case, the Court held that the mere fact that a deponent has made contradictory statements at two different stages in a judicial proceeding is not by itself always sufficient to justify prosecution for perjury, but it must be established that the deponent has intentionally given a false statement or fabricated false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of the judicial proceeding. It is immaterial that the false evidence is relevant or not in relation to the case.
In K.Karunakaran vs. T.V.Eachvri, AIR 1978 SC 290 case the Court held that a false statement is alone not sufficient, intention of the accused must also be present.
In Santokh Singh vs Izhar Hussain, AIR 1973 SC 2190 case, the Court held that a statement on oath falsely supporting a prosecution case against an accused falls under sections 193 and 195 of the Indian Penal Code and not under section 211 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 196 IPC:
Using Evidence Known to be False:
Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true or genuine evidence any evidence which he knows to be false or fabricated, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave or fabricated false evidence.
Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes punishment for using false evidence as true and genuine with knowledge to be false similar to the punishment prescribed for giving false evidence or fabricating false evidence under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
A person when uses evidence which he knows it to be false comes under Section 196. Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true or genuine evidence any evidence which he knows to be fabricated or false evidence. The intention which does not fall in dishonestly or fraudulently but against the spirit of criminal law then it comes under the category of corruptly.
In Dr. S. Dutt vs State Of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1966 SC 523 case, where a doctor S Dutta who specialized in the field of medicine and he was called for an expert witness where he was asked to furnish the certificate as he was an expert. Now he had furnished certificate but after some time in enquiry, it was found that it was false. Now the court enquires under which section the accused must be charged. Section 465 talks about dishonesty and Section 471 talks about fraudulently but the conduct of Dr Dutta did not come under dishonestly or fraudulently. Supreme Court held that the conduct of Dr Dutta should be covered under Section 196 under a phrase corruptly. Corruptly is a term (long) which is different from fraudulently and intention.
Section 197 IPC:
Issuing or Signing False Certificate:
Whoever issues or signs any certificate required by law to be given or signed, or relating to any fact of which such certificate is by law admissible in evidence, knowing or believing that such certificate is false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
Section 197 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes punishment for issuing or signing false certificate that is admissible in evidence by virtue of operation of law, similar to the punishment prescribed for giving false evidence under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ingredients of Section 197:
- The accused issued or signed a certificate;
- Such certificate was required in law to be issued or signed;
- It related to admission of a fact;
- It is legally admissible in evidence;
- The certificate is false on material particulars;
- The accused knew or had reason to believe that it was false.
Section 198 IPC:
Using as True a Certificate Known to be False:
Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use any such certificate as a true certificate, knowing the same to be false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
Section 198 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes punishment for using a false certificate as a true certificate with knowledge that the said certificate is a false certificate, similar to the punishment prescribed for giving false evidence under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ingredients of Section 198:
- False certificate was issued by the accused;
- It was acted upon by the accused as true;
- The accused used it corruptly
Section 199 IPC:
False Statement Made in Declaration Which is By Law Receivable as Evidence:
Whoever, in any declaration made or subscribed by him, which declaration any Court of Justice, or any public servant or other person, is bound or authorised by law to receive as evidence of any fact, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, touching any point material to the object for which the declaration is made or used, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
In Dy.GM, ISBT Vs Sudarshan Kumari, AIR 1996 SC 1894 case the Court held that an oath was taken in this case which was taken on the name of a notary which does not exist so it was said that it was a clear violation of Section 199 of Indian Penal Code.
Section 200 IPC:
Using as True Such Declaration Knowing it to be False:
Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true any such declaration, knowing the same to be false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
Explanation:
A declaration which is inadmissible merely upon the ground of some informality, is a declaration within the meaning of sections 199 and 200.
Section 200 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes punishment for using a false declaration as true with knowledge that the said declaration is false, similar to the punishment prescribed for giving false evidence or fabricating false evidence under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ingredients of Section 200:
- The accused made a false declaration;
- The declaration was false in material particulars;
- The accused knew it to be false;
- The accused used or attempted to use such declaration;
- It was done corruptly;
- The declaration was admissible in evidence.
In Amarsang Nathaji vs.Hardhik Harshadbhai Patel, AIR 2016 SC 5384 case, the Court held that making of a contradictory statement in a judicial proceeding is not sufficient to justify prosecution under section 199 and 200 of the Indian Penal Code but it must be shown that the defendant has intentionally given a false statement or fabricated false evidence for the purpose of using the same at any stage of judicial proceedings.