RAJKUMAR PATHAK Vs. PANKAJ TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 r/w 340 of CrPC for taking action against the respondent for making false declaration and filing false affidavit before this Court in M.Cr.C.No.2685/2016.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the report of applicant police registered Crime No.1322/2015 at P.S. Garha for the offence punishable under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the respondent and co-accused Ghanshyam Tiwari, Smt. Deepa Tiwari, Ajay Tiwari and Laxman Tiwari @ Krishna Datt Tiwari. Respondent had filed an application under section 438 of CrPC, 1973 before this court for getting anticipatory bail in the crime, which was registered as M.Cr.C.No.2685/2016 and disposed by this court vide order dated 06/02/16. In that application, respondent stated that no application for bail is filed by the co-accused persons to the best his knowledge and also filed an affidavit in support of his application. While the respondent Pankaj Tiwari is real son of co-accused Ghanshyam Tiwari and Smt. Deepa Tiwari and is residing with them and earlier he had also filed an application for grant of anticipatory bail to him and his parents before the learned Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in the crime which was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, thereafter respondent filed bail application before this court.

(3.) Likewise respondent filed a representation before the police authorities and a copy of which was filed by the parents of the respondent before this Court as additional documents in their bail application which was registered as M.Cr.C.No.94/2016. Respondent even claimed parity for getting similar benefit as extended to his parents by this Court while disposing of the bail application filed by them, therefore, it is very much clear that the respondent was aware about the filing and disposing of the bail application of his parents co-accused of the crime before this court and inspite of having knowledge of this fact he deliberately made false declaration on affidavit before this Court that he had no knowledge of filing of bail by the co-accused persons of the crime. So cognizance of offence punishable under Sections 191, 192, 193 and 420 of IPC be taken against him. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on the Apex Court judgment passed in the case of Sciemed Overseas Inc. v. BOC India Limited and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 70 and the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Delton Impex Pvt. Ltd. Katni v. Sanjay Dang and others reported in 2009 (2) MPLJ (Cri.) 13 .