You are on page 1of 8

Men Rights India

Men Rights, Man Sense!

Click here for more videos!
You are here: Home » Uncategorized » CrPC 340 procedure cannot be bypassed by trial
CrPC 340 procedure cannot be bypassed by trial court
25 Feb
by videv 6 Comments
This Punjab and Haryana High court judgment says that if an application under CrPC
340 is moved (for filing false affidavit in this case), then the court must
undertake the procedure for CrPC 340 in disposing that application. It was not
correct on part of trial court to refer cursorily to the mentioned fact of false
affidavit in judgment, and thus dismissing the CrPC 340 application by being silent
on the issue.

So the takeaway for people facing false 498a and maintenance cases is to go for
perjury application under CrPC 340 if you have good evidence like false affidavit,
wrongly mentioned fact about not-working, wrong salary mentioned etc.


CHANDIGARH CRA No. 197 SB of 2010 (O&M)

Date of decision: 25-1-2010

Sunny Bhumbla ………Appellant Vs


Present: Shri K.S.Boparai, Advocate, for the appellant. HARBANS LAL, J.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 5.12.2008 Annexure P-1 passed by
the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Saheed Bhagat Singh Nagar vide
which he allowed the petition moved under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for
restitution of conjugal rights leaving the parties to bear their own costs and
rejected the application moved under Section 195/340 Cr.P.C.

Read my maintenance book (DV and CrPC 125) if you want to save HARD EARNED money

Download my free PDF eBook Surviving the Legal Jungle

Don't be a lone ranger... JOIN our Facebook group to connect

Read this FREE eBook written by fathers involved in child custody issues

I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, besides perusing the record
with due care and circumspection. The learned counsel for the appellant has
submitted with great eloquence that after the respondent admitted in her cross-
examination about her employment, salary and inheritance
of the landed property, she again placed on record another affidavit dated
27.8.2008 solemnly affirming therein that she had inadvertently not mentioned about
the source of income as well as employment in the earlier affidavit dated
14.8.2008. Thereafter the appellant moved an application under Section 195 of
Cr.P.C. for initiating proceedings against the respondent for submitting a
false affidavit CRA No. 197 SB of 2010 (O&M) 2 before the learned trial Court, in
order to get more maintenance from the appellant. The learned trial Court had
assured the appellant that his said application shall be decided alongwith the main
case. While deciding the main petition, in paragraph No. 13 of the judgment it has
been observed that “in support of her claim for interim maintenance under Section
24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the
respondent/applicant had made certain assertions, which were found to be totally
false and the same had apparently been done by her in a deliberate manner.
Consequently even an application for initiating suitable proceedings against her on
account of her having submitted a false affidavit was also filed
by the petitioner on 3.9.2008. Thereafter, the respondent did not press her claim
for interim maintenance, but the same did not absolve her of the liability of the
aforesaid lapse. This court, however, does not wish to initiate any such
proceedings against the respondent with the hope that sooner or later, the parties
may be in a position to resolve their dispute or else this young couple may adopt
such other means so that they can part their ways
in a peaceful manner and therefore, with a view to avoid undue complication of the
matrimonial dispute, no action on account of submitting of the above false
affidavit etc. is being initiated against the respondent.”

It is further argued that the learned trial Court has overlooked

the fact that the respondent has used the false affidavit in the judicial
proceedings. Therefore, all the ingredients of the offences of cheating,
forging and perjury etc. are made out and consequently, the order passed by the
learned trial Court in not initiating the proceedings under Section 195 read
with Section 340 Cr.P.C. is illegal.

CRA No. 197 SB of 2010 (O&M) 3 I have given a deep and thoughtful
consideration to these submissions.

A careful perusal of the observations rendered by the learned trial

Court in paragraph No. 13 of the impugned judgment would reveal that there is
not even a shred of reference to the application moved under Section 195 read
with Section 340 Cr.P.C. This apart, no specific reasons have been apportioned
for not initiating the action on the basis of the alleged affidavit. The said
application having been moved under the provisions of the Code of Criminal
Procedure was required to be disposed of separately. It was not desirable on the
part of the learned trial Court to decide the said application in a slip shod
manner by making mere passing reference to the alleged affidavit. In the
application moved under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. if the Court deems fit, the
inquiry has to be held whereas in the present one, the impugned order is
absolutely silent as to whether or not inquiry was held. There is specific
procedure which is to be followed while disposing of an application moved under
Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 340 of the Criminal
Procedure Code reads as under:-

“340.Procedure in cases mentioned in Sec.195–(1) When, upon an

application made to it in this behalf or otherwise any Court is of the opinion
that it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made
into any offence referred to to in cl (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 195,
which appears to have been committed in or in relation to to a proceeding in
that Court, or as the case may be, in respect of of a document produced or
given in evidence in a proceeding in that Court, CRA No. 197 SB of 2010 (O&M) 4
such Court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary.

(a) record a finding to that effect.

(b) make a complaint thereof in writing

(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction.

(d) take sufficient security for the appearance of the accused before
such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non- bailable and the Court
thinks it necessary so to do, send the accused in custody to such Magistrate;
and (e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such

(2) The power conferred on a Court by sub-section (1) in respect of an

offence may, in any case where that Court has neither made a complaint under
sub-section (1) in respect of that offence nor rejected an application for the
making of such complaint, be exercised by the Court to which such former Court
is subordinate within the meaning of sub-section (4) of Sec.195.

(3) A complaint made under this section shall be signed (a)

where the Court making complaint is a High Court, by such officer of the Court
as the Court may appoint.

(b) in any other case, by the presiding officer of the Court,

and (4) In this section, “Court” has the same meaning as in CRA No.
197 SB of 2010 (O&M) 5 Sec.195.”

A glance through the impugned order would reveal that the learned
trial Court has given a go by to the provisions of Section 340 Cr.P.C. The
approach adopted by the learned trial Court is unwholesome and is depreciable.

The impugned order is absolutely silent as to whether the application has been
dismissed or allowed, if so for which reasons. In consequence of the preceding
discussion the trial Court is directed to decide the application under discussion
in accordance with law. This appeal stands disposed of accordingly.



January 25, 2010


NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No

FacebookGoogle+TwitterWhatsAppGoogle GmailPrintShare

Applicability of section 340 of CrPC, and 194 of IPC etc

The Entitled Middle class Princess syndrome (article) Five chill-pills for the
femino-phobic chaps who want #FeminismMuktBharat (news) Why dowry is not evil as
painted by MSM (article) Feminism in India will not help the girl child- Part I

Get latest posts for FREE by email. Join 3350 subscribers!

Filed Under: Uncategorized
Tagged With: CrPC 340

Basalt Kumar Newar says

August 11, 2017 at 7:13 pm
Perjury is strong and filed in courts so 340 CrPC filed after dismissal 341 CrPC
filed and dismissed is a clear case of corruption as more than 100 rulings of Apex
court and H’courts given in written argument. So in my opinion only SLP,case in
h’court u/s340(2) CrPC or notice u/s 51A{(h) to all the highest level of India by
laws for action immediately.

April 8, 2015 at 10:59 pm
Respected sir ,

Recently i am submitting Perjury again my wife in section 191 & 195 ,in crpc340 .
Perjury is very strong because she told in oath she is not working & i am submitted
PF detail from 2009 to 2014 march.she claimed interim from 2012 November.Rs 1500
per month. recent i loose my job also , i said to judge but judge waiting for his
Now question is If perjury is strong then why judge waiting for say . give me a
concrit judgement emideat stop interim & through the file in dustbin.

videv says
April 9, 2015 at 9:41 am
I can’t say about the specific reason in this case why judge is not giving the

In general, one should remember that men want to be white knights and protector of
women, and judges won’t be immune to that psychology either. It is statistically
proven that women get lesser punishment for same crimes than men. Google it.

Many men themselves who approach us don’t seem to have much desire to pursue the
case to its logical end, they just want a to know “how to get out of these cases”,
maybe because they have hopes of finding another female after their cases are over.
That is also known to the System, which wants to milk husbands to the maximum
extent but will conveniently find multiple ways of not prosecuting the women/wives
for false cases and allegations.

Gautam says
March 27, 2017 at 9:01 am
Did the case reach logical conclusion. I am stuck in a similar case as it’s. And I
am putting all my strength to get a perjury verdict. It would help me if you could
share the judgement.

videv says
March 27, 2017 at 12:05 pm
Some SC judgments are here on CrPC 340:

Manish says
March 16, 2015 at 12:09 pm
This is very helpful. Thanks a lot.
Your work is really a morale booster..


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Name *

Email *


To prevent spam bots, pls enter answer below! *
 × 3 = 9

 For 498a/DV/Maintenance/child custody-visitation/abusive-wife/false cases, CALL
volunteers' phone lines (for short phone calls only):
(Be respectful or be ignored)
1. Kannada/English: +919738010456
2. Punjabi/Hindi/English: +919780234100
3. Hindi/Bengali/Marathi/English: +917738130141
4. Tamil/English: +919962514226

Join WhatsApp/Facebook groups

How to assess your false case and marriage breakup probability

How to take action against police or magistrate for 498A arrest without following
CrPC 41 41A?
Why Indian men should be very careful in filing divorce
What to do if CAW cell/police/advocate is putting pressure to compromise
Innocent until proven guilty is the law, use it!
Advice to men on 498a, maintenance, DV, divorce, child custody, what else
How to find and manage your lawyer in 498a, DV, CrPC 125, divorce, RCR cases
How to fight false cases of DV, Maintenance, CrPC 125, 498a etc
How to assess maintenance amount likely to be ordered in CrPC 125 or HMA 24
Notes and questions on court procedures
What should be my stand in court?
Understanding the divorce industry in India

About the book

Read judgments at Bharat Law
IPC 498A Judgments
IPC 406 Judgments
DV Act Judgments
CrPC 125 Judgments
Child Custody Judgments


Dowry, Stridhan, Cruelty under 498a, marriage expenses, and…

Why Indian men should be very careful in filing divorce
How to assess your false case and marriage breakup…
SC 2017 guidelines on IPC 498A misuse: family welfare…
Basic Cross-examination techniques in matrimonial cases like
How to safeguard from and punish a false rape complainant
File RTIs to police for false cases’ prosecution under
Men ki Baat – Counselling, Discussion of personal…
How to fight false cases of DV, maintenance, CrPC 125, 498A…
Both parents are responsible for unmarried daughter’s…

Get latest posts for FREE by email. Join 3350 subscribers!


498A Activism Arrest Child Support Child_Custody_Visitation Commando Gyan Commando

Strategy Commando Techniques CrPC CrPC 125 Cruelty Divorce Domestic Violence
Industry Dowry DV Act Judgments Evidence False Case False Rape Family Law Feminazis
Feminist Figures Feminist Propaganda Fight Back HC Judgment Hindu Marriage Act HMA
24 IPC Law Making Law Misuse Legal Info live-in Maintenance Marriage Men Rights NCW
NRI Police Press Release PWDVA(DV Act) Rape RTI SC Judgment Supreme Court WCD Women
Reservation Bill



email: I am facing false DV case. I love your blog. It really have me boost to
fight this case and I feel so happy that you guys are doing such a commendable

comment: Your survey is 100 % true. whatever is written in this blog matches more
than 90 % of my marriage life situation.

comment: The Article is really great, it’s actually happening in my life. whatever
is mentioned here is the tactics are used by my wife and still going on….

comment: This is a very good article, and some points mentioned here are the real
reasons males are threatened to shell out the maintenance amount

comment: This document is very help for me,becoise i am sufring for false dowry
case and fiting for thank for to u.

comment: The web content is very useful for its diversity and especially for
atrocities committed upon men, emitting a clarion call for them to rise and defend
their rights and hood.
comment: Thanks you People doing very may allah grant you Success. Ameen.

comment: This is very helpful. Thanks a lot. Your work is really a morale booster..

Tweets by @MenRightsIndia

Vivek Deveshwar



Husband can get maintenance from wife

24 Aug 2009 By videv Leave a Comment

Addresses to post letters/faxes to

18 Oct 2009 By videv Leave a Comment

No proof of cruelty leads to no maintenance

1 Jul 2010 By videv 2 Comments

FREE Live Webinar/Online Meetings for WhatsApp and Facebook members

6 Nov 2015 By videv 4 Comments

Gender neutral sexual harassment bill is welcome step

23 Mar 2010 By videv 5 Comments


Download IMD handbook

videv on Dowry, Stridhan, Cruelty under 498a, marriage expenses, and more
videv on Section 41, 41A, 41B of CrPC which govern arrest by police without warrant
videv on TERI chief Dr R K Pachauri faces IPC 354, 354A, 354D, 506; media trial
starts now
videv on SC 2017 guidelines on IPC 498A misuse: family welfare committees,
designated IO, less arrests/more settlements, easier bail, recovery of articles,
personal exemption to family members etc
Akash Kumar on Dowry, Stridhan, Cruelty under 498a, marriage expenses, and more

All Posts
DV Act Judgments
Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
498A Judgments