The offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath is called Perjury. It’s basically lying under an oath and thereby violating the oath. Perjury can be said to be an offence of giving false evidence at any stage of the judicial/court proceedings.

As a matter of fact IPC has never used the word ‘perjury’ as it is, but instead it has used, ‘false evidence’. The Indian Penal Code defines perjury in sections as:

S.191. 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.

S.193. Punishment for false evidence.—Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabri­cates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine, and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either de­scription for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Another relevant section of the code is:

S.196. Using Evidence Known To Be False. – Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true or genuine evidence any evidence which he knows to be false or fabricated, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave or fabricated false evidence.

Many a times a witness is said to turn hostile when he changes his previous stand or whatever he said previously under an oath, and this is generally the trend in the high profile cases. In the infamous case of murder of Jessica Lall, perjury proceedings were ordered only against two witnesses, for taking u-turns during the trial which ‘prima facie’ indicates their desire to ‘help the accused’, while several others were discharged saying that no ‘prima facie’ case is made against them.

Justice D P Wadhwa in SC’s case of Swaran Singh versus State of Punjab (2000), remarked, “Perjury has also become a way of life in the law courts. A trial judge knows that the witness is telling a lie and is going back on his previous statement, yet he does not wish to punish him or even file a complaint against him. He is required to sign the complaint himself, which deters him from filing the complaint. Perhaps law needs amendment to clause (b) of Section 340 (3) of Cr.P.C. In this respect, as the high court can direct any officer to file a complaint, to get rid of the evil of perjury, the court should resort to the use of the provisions of law as contained in chapter XXVI of crc.” 

The procedure under S.340 is quite cumbersome. There is a summary procedure under Section 344 of Crpc, an alternative to Section 340, but it hasn’t been really utilised by the courts much.

Briefly stated:

PROSECUTION OF PERJURY:

1. Legal obligation to state the truth

2. The making of a false statement.

3. Belief in its falsity.

Criteria for establishing offense:

(a) The statement is false

(b) The parson making the statement knew or believed it to be false or did not believe it to be true.

(c) The statement was made intentionally.

All three criteria must be proved for conviction. Intention is most important.

False evidence is said to be given intentionally, if, the person making the statement is aware or has knowledge that it is false and has deliberately used such evidence in a judicial proceeding with the intention of deceiving the court.

ELEMENTS OF PERJURY:

 1) False statement made by a person Who is —
a) Bound by an oath
b) By an express provision of law
c) A declaration which a person is bound by law to make on any subject
d) Which statement or declaration is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true.

2. Oath must be administered by a person of competent authority.
The authority must be competent to administer the oath. The proceedings where oath is administered must be sanctioned by law.

 3. Express provisions of law include—Plaints, Written Statements, and other pleadings.
A) CPC casts a legal duty to speak the truth
B) Verification of pleadings is a legal obligation.

 4. Affidavits are declaration made under oath.

 5. A statement could be verbal or otherwise.

A) Statement that he believes a thing which he does not believe.
B) Statement that he knows a thing which he does not know.
C) Statement that he knows to be false or does not believe to be true.
D) Statement need not be on a point material to the proceedings.

An oath or solemn affirmation is not a sine qua non in the offence of giving false evidence. The offence may be committed although the person giving evidence has neither been sworn nor affirmed.

In UK, Section 1 of Perjury Act, 1911 defines the term perjury. It states that any person who lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, shall be guilty of perjury. The punishment prescribed is penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both.

Perjury is extremely difficult to prove. A prosecutor has to show not only that there was a material misstatement of fact, but also that it was done so willfully—that the person knew it was false when they said it. In Bronston v. United States, a unanimous Supreme Court held that a literally true but unresponsive answer could not form the basis of a perjury conviction even if the individual intended to mislead.

Following is difference between the English and the Indian laws: