consequences of depositing false affidavit

 Consequences of depositing false affidavit

In 1981, the society assigned A to an apartment. B (A's wife) swore an affidavit in 1983

claiming that neither she nor her husband had been assigned an apartment in Noida.

According to the regulations, the society assigned her an apartment.

According to the regulations, no member of the society can be assigned more than one

apartment. B filed a deceleration suit against society, which was granted by the trial court,

and affirmed by the High Court. The Supreme Court overturned the same ruling that there

was a breach of contract because B swore a false affidavit by hiding her husband's

assignment of a Noida flat.

This Court was evaluating an affidavit sworn by an Advocate under Section 3(2) of the Oaths

Act, 1969 in M. Veera Bhadra Rao Vs. Tek Chand 1984(Supp) SCC 571: The term

"affidavit" has long been used to refer to a sworn declaration in writing given under oath or

on affirmation before an authorised Magistrate or authority. Affidavit is defined as

"affirmation and declaration in the instance of a person by law entitled to affirm or declare

instead of swearing" under sub-clause (3) of Section 3 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.

The main parts of an affidavit are that the deponent makes important assertions or

declarations, and to add sanctity to it, he swears or affirms the truth of the statements made in

the presence of a person who is legally authorised to administer oath or accept the

affirmation.

As a result, the cancellation of a plot allotment obtained after filing a fraudulent affidavit is a

valid reason for terminating a lease. All decisions taken by this Court are void because of

fraud.

As a result, affidavits submitted were more than just a piece of paper; they were a serious

declaration made in front of a person authorised to administer oaths or receive affirmations.

The plaintiff had broken an oath-based solemn statement.

Giving False Evidence (Section 191)

Whoever makes any statement that is false and which he either knows or believes to be

invalid or does not believe to be true while being legally bound by an oath or an express

provision of law to state the truth, or who is legally bound by law to make a declaration on

any subject, is said to give false evidence.

Section 193 – False Evidence Punishment

Whoever knowingly gives false evidence in any judicial procedure, or fabricates false

evidence to be utilised at any stage of a legal proceeding, will be punished by imprisonment

of any sort for a time up to seven years, as well as a fine. In any other circumstance, anyone

wilfully offers and fabricates false evidence shall be punished by imprisonment of either sort

for a time that may amount to three years, as well as a fine.

Murray & Company vs. Ashok Kumar Newatia & Associates

The Supreme Court ruled in this case that "the practise of including false evidence in an

affidavit presented before a court should always be discouraged, and we hereby record the

same." The defendant's affirmation of a false affidavit in front of this court is rather severe,

and he has therefore rendered himself guilty of contempt of this court, as previously stated.

Jagdish Singh and others vs. Baban Singh and others

"Swearing falsely when one is compelled by oath to disclose the truth because an affidavit is

a statement made under oath," the Supreme Court said in this instance. As a result, affidavits

fall under the criteria of offering false evidence."

Conclusion- An affidavit, it may be inferred, is a very important document. Although

authorised representatives sign it, it is anticipated that only those who are intimately familiar

with the facts of the case sign it.