O.P. BHARUKA Vs. SHAKUNTALA MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal Under Section 341 Cr.PC preferred by Shri Om Prakash Bharuka, appellant herein against respondent Nos. 1 and 2, respondent 1 being his wife (since divorced). The appellant has assailed the order dated 30.11.1993 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Dibrugarh in Misc. (J) Case No. 96/92 arising out of the Title (Divorce) Suit No. 8/88 on the grounds, inter alia, that the court below failed to take note of the primary object of the proceeding Under Section 340 Cr.PC which is meant for the purpose of curbing the evil of perjury. That the false evidence given by the respondents/O.P. were pinpointed with utmost precision and the court below ought to have instituted a complaint against the respondents. That the respondents/O.P. used the court as a tool to further their petty selfish interest whereby the appellant was seriously prejudiced. That the provisions of Section 340 Cr.PC is meant for larger interest of administration of justice and the court below ought to have taken appropriate action to punish the respondents/O.P. for taking recourse to perjury by deliberate and conscious act.

(2.) THE appeal is a long pending one and none appears for the appellant when the case is taken up for hearing. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the respondents/O.P. 1 and 2.

(3.) SECTION 340 is the first section coming under Chapter XXVI dealing with 'provisions as to offence affecting the administration of justice' and it goes as follows :