Chapter XXVI
Section 344 CrPC: Summary procedure for trial for giving false evidence
New Law Update (2024)
Section 373 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Court of Session or Magistrate of the first class
Punishment
Procedural – Cognizance
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) If, at the time of delivery of any judgment or final order disposing of any judicial proceeding, a Court of Session or Magistrate of the first class expresses an opinion to the effect that any witness appearing in such proceeding had knowingly or wilfully given false evidence or had fabricated false evidence with the intention that such evidence should be used in such proceeding, it or he may, if satisfied that it is necessary and expedient in the interest of justice that the witness should be tried summarily for giving or fabricating, as the case may be, false evidence, take cognizance of the offence and may, after giving the offender a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished for such offence, try such offender summarily and sentence him to imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or to fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
(2) In every such case the Court shall follow, as nearly as may be practicable, the procedure prescribed for summary trials.
(3) Nothing in this section shall affect the power of the Court to make a complaint under section 340 for the offence, where it does not choose to proceed under this section.
(4) Where, after any action is initiated under Sub-Section (1), it is made to appear to the Court of Session or Magistrate of the first class that an appeal or an application for revision has been preferred or filed against the judgment or order in which the opinion referred to in that Sub-Section has been expressed, it or he shall stay further proceedings of the trial until the disposal of the appeal or the application for revision, as the case may be, and thereupon the further proceedings of the trial shall abide by the results of the appeal or application for revision.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 344(1)
This sub-section empowers a Court of Session or a First Class Magistrate to summarily try a witness who has knowingly or wilfully given or fabricated false evidence during a judicial proceeding, if deemed necessary and expedient for justice. The maximum punishment includes three months imprisonment or a five hundred rupees fine, or both.
Section 344(4)
This crucial sub-section mandates a stay of the summary trial proceedings under Section 344(1) if an appeal or revision has been filed against the main judgment in which the opinion about false evidence was expressed. The summary trial’s continuation will then depend on the outcome of that appeal or revision.
Landmark Judgements
Baldev Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 747:
The Supreme Court clarified that Section 344 confers a special power on the court itself to take cognizance of an offence of giving false evidence during a judicial proceeding, emphasizing that this power is distinct and to be exercised by the court in which such false evidence was given.
Mohd. Ashraf v. State of Bihar, 1993 CriLJ 2969 (Patna HC):
The Patna High Court underscored that the power under Section 344 CrPC is discretionary and should only be exercised when the court is satisfied that it is ‘necessary and expedient in the interest of justice’ to summarily try a witness for perjury, not as a matter of routine.