ANIL KUMAR RATHORE Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vivek Prakash Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Dileep Kumar learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Priyanka Midha learned counsel for the respondent no. 4/complainant and Ms. Meena learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) The petitioner herein is seeking for quashing of the first information report dated 25.6.2021 registered as Case Crime No. 466 of 2021, under Ss. 147, 148, 419, 195, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Anoop Shahar, District Bulandshahar on two grounds:

(3.) The contention is that the statement of the witnesses recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer cannot be used for any purpose at any inquiry or trial in respect of any offence. The only exception is that if the witness is called for the prosecution in such inquiry or trial, his said statement or any part of it, if reduced in writing, may be used by the prosecution to contradict the said witness, in such manner as provided under Sec. 145 of the Indian Evidence Act. To constitute an offence under Sec. 195 IPC, "the intention to procure conviction" by giving or fabricating false evidence, thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely, that it will cause any person to be convicted of an offence punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of seven years or upwards, is necessary. The contention is that the production of false evidence before a Court of law intending thereby to cause the accused to be convicted of the aforesaid offence would amount to commission of offence under Sec. 195 IPC. The crucial condition to constitute offence under Sec. 195 IPC, according to the petitioner, is whether on the alleged fabricated material, the possibility of conviction was there or not.