The case originally started as a
divorce, but perjury (lying under oath) became the most important issue.
After marrying in 2012, the
couple separated just 65 days later. This led to a massive legal battle with
more than 40 different lawsuits filed in Delhi, Lucknow, and Ghaziabad.
These cases covered everything from demands for financial support (maintenance)
to domestic violence and criminal charges. While the main matter and other
cases were eventually dismissed, the legal trouble regarding the false
statements made in court on oath continued.
The husband accused the wife of perjury in her affidavits containing false
financial details and concealed facts, prompting applications under Section 340
CrPC and Section 379 r/w 215 BNSS. The Court independently verified case lists
from High Courts and identified discrepancies, such as omitted proceedings in
the petitioner's submissions. The Court dissolved their marriage under
Article 142 due to total breakdown but kept those perjury cases alive, saying
no one pollutes justice like that. Super clear warning: courts hate false
oaths. It emphasised that false
statements under oath "pollute the stream of justice," referencing
precedents like Kusha Duruka vs. State of Odisha to affirm
that courts must address such misconduct rigorously.
While disposing of most pending matters, the Supreme Court directed that
the perjury applications—two under Section 379 r/w 215 BNSS and two under
Section 340 CrPC—proceed on merits before the trial courts. It clarified that
similar future claims would be evaluated case-by-case, reinforcing judicial
intolerance for deliberate falsehoods.
Now with AI spotting deepfakes,
digital forensics checking every document, and tools like blockchain or court
e-filing trails, lies get caught super fast. In 2026, risking jail under IPC
Sections 191-193 for perjury is plain stupid when tech exposes it all.
Seriously, don't even think about it – just tell the truth and save everyone
the headache.
Comments
Post a Comment