What is the significance of an affidavit when the court dismiss the petition?

all plaints or ia or written staements are supported by affidavits. after dismissal of the plaint or written statement what is the significance of the affidavit? whether it amounts to giving false evidence is a crime against the state? is it true?

Answers:
Just because a Petition is dismissed does not necessarily mean that the Affidavit contained false evidence. Dismissal of a Petition simply means that the petition is not maintainable for whatever reasons which may or may not include perjury .

An Affidavit (in any matter) submitted to a Court of law, simply means that the Deponent has made the statements contained in his Affidavit,on oath before a person competent to receive such oaths. The statements in the Affidavit would form the basis for the Deponent claiming whatever relief it is that he claims. The Deponent is obliged to state the truth in any Affidavit submitted to a competent authority, and he can be prosecuted for Perjury i.e. giving false evidence on oath, if it is shown that his Affidavit contained any falsehoods. A benchmark judgment of the Supreme Court in this context is:
'Re : Suo Moto Proceedings against Mr. R. Karuppan, Advocate', AIR 2001 SC 2004. The Zahira Shaikh case is another example, however the reasoning given re: Evils of Perjury in the Karuppan case is more specific for citation purposes.

Much earlier former SC Chief Justice Krishna Iyer had also directed that courts must be pro-active and take strict penal action in every case where litigants resort to perjury. The judgment is:- T. Arivandandam vs. T.V. Satyapal and Another, (1977) 4 SCC 467

Most judges especially in lower courts are overburdened and would not be inclined to take suo moto notice of Perjury. It is therefore necessary for the aggrieved party to file an Application u/Sec.340 CrPC within the main matter, praying for the Court to sanction and initiate action against the opponent for offences of Perjury (which come under Chap.X of IPC). It will be necessary to show prima facie that the offence was committed with mens rea i.e. with malafide intent / with intent to gain by such malafides. If the Court is satisfied, it will issue a Show Cause notice to the accused Party, or in the case of higher courts, may direct the Registry to file the complaint of Perjury at the concerned court. However, even when this happens, conviction rates are usually low because the trial is statutorily conducted by the Public Prosecutor who is mostly incompetent and indifferent apart from having many other cases to prosecute. The aggrieved party, if he wants justice, should therefore file an Application u/S.302 CrPC to be heard in this matter whenever it comes up at the magistrates court.

Lawyers are usually dismissive when their clients suggest taking action against Perjury committed by the opponent. This is because most lawyers routinely commit perjury in the affidavits prepared by them on behalf of their clients. That is why it is so important for any client to thoroughly read every submission prepared by his lawyer, and thereafter point out and ensure that any errors, falsehoods (intentional or otherwise) etc are corrected. Remember that the Deponent is personally liable for the contents of his sworn Affidavit, not the lawyer.
A fantastic question indeed. True, in all litigations only one side wins. But both sides would have filed affidavits of evidence. Per-se, it does not make the affidavits of the witnesses of the losing side perjurious. The court weighs the evidence, concludes on weightier one or more reliable one and based on the conclusion, renders its judgement. The affidavits not relied upon, do not become containers of lies. If only the winning side pursues the "suppressio veri and suggestio falsi" aspect of the affidavit in question, and is able to prove the "deliberation" involved therein, in a separate complaint petition before the jurisdictional magistrate or such an exercise is ordered by the trial judge directing the registrar of the court to lodge a complaint of perjury, the process begins and takes its own logical course in the criminal trial before the magistrate. All defences available in criminal trials are available in this also, with right of appeal,revision petition, writ appeal etc.
If every affidavit forms the basis for prosecution for perjury, then India's half the population would be in courts in one capacity or the other.
No that’s not the case that affidavits in support of any petition/written statement/application become false or incorrect that they will amount to perjury an offence punishable under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code. In order to understand what actually means by perjury we should see the definition as given under section 191 of the Indian Penal Code Giving false evidence.--Whoever, being legally bound by an
oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth, or being
bound by law to make a declaration upon any subject, makes any
statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be
false or does not believe to be true, is said to give false evidence.
Explanation 1.-A statement is within the meaning of this section
whether it is made verbally or otherwise.
Explanation 2.-A false statement as to the belief of the person
attesting is within the meaning of this section, and a person may be
guilty of giving false evidence by stating that he believes a thing
which he does not believe, as well as by stating that he knows a thing
Which he does not know. As stated in the definition its not that any declaration or statement made on oath will become false unless such a declaration or statement known to be or believed to be false or was believed to be untruthful. Now here try to understand the factor of knowledge of such declaration or statement being false or untruthful. A person makes a declaration or statement with best of his knowledge to be truthful cannot be said to be untruthful just it found to be false or wrong, according to him it was truthful as he believed it to be, but it was found to be false or untruthful later on doesn’t mean he has to be blamed for his misconception about its truthfulness or its falseness, unless he knew this fact that it was false or untruthful, but he still made such a declaration or statement in the proceedings in the form of affidavits. Perjury means telling lies knowingly on oath before any authorities. The knowledge of false hood & untruthfulness is most important factor in complaint regarding perjury not otherwise. Read these 2 examples :- (1) A, being bound by an oath to state the truth, states that he
believes a certain signature to be the handwriting of Z, when he does
not believe it to be the handwriting of Z. Here A states that which he
knows to be false, and therefore gives false evidence. (2) A, knowing the general character of Z's handwriting, states
that he believes a certain signature to be the handwriting of Z; A in
good faith believing it to be so. Here A's statement is merely as to
his belief, and is true as to his belief, and therefore, although the
signature may not be the handwriting of Z, A has not given false
evidence.
Hope now you understand what is perjury punishable offence & what is not.


The Answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:


More Questions and Answers: