Affidavit In Support Of An Application For A Caution Or: Fill & Download for Free

File a Perjury caseFile For Malicious ProsecutionMalicious Prosecution Section 211 in The Indian Penal Code211. False charge of offence made with the intent to injure.—Whoev­er, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person,shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; andif such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, 1[imprisonment for life], or imprisonment for seven years or upwards,shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.___________________________The basic ingredients of a malicious case are:-The original case must have ended in the clear acquittal of the defendantThe case should have been on genuine grounds or any just causeThe case must have been pursued mainly for injuring the other._____________________________In fact, the prosecutors and the law enforcement officials have immunity from unnecessary prosecution while engaging in their official duties butif anybody can prove that the prosecutor or law enforcers have acted in excess of their normal scope of authority they cannot claim such immunity.In such a case they would also come under the charge of malicious prosecution and consequent punishment of civil and criminal nature.If a person can prove that he/ she has suffered a monetary loss such as lost wages, loss of employment, advocate fee paid etc in the course of any malicious prosecution against him he may be awarded the actual cost._____________________________Similarly, defamation also applies. Section 499 states whoever by words makes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm the reputation of a person is said to defame that person. Section 500 of the IPC provides for punishment for defamation.The person prosecuting someone for filing a malicious case must establish that the accused had the intention to cause injury -section 44 of the IPC defines the term “injury” - to the reputation or property.Injury, as per the definition, means any harm caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property. It must also be proved beyond doubt that the accused had knowledge of the fact that no just cause exists for filing the original case.However, if the allegation made in the case is true or conveys a caution to the society it does not fall within the ambit of defamation.Either the inability of a complainant in the original case to prove the charges or the falling of his/ her the evidence short of required standard in the trial is not a valid ground to prove malice.The acquittal of a person on some technical grounds is not a valid ground for anyone to file a case against the petitioner for malicious prosecution.A statement of oath falsely supporting the prosecution case against an accused or a statement to the police, do not fall within the meaning of section 211 of the IPC. What is really required is to clearly prove the malice, injury and culpable nature of the prosecution in the original case in order to file a case against the petitioner of a malicious case.___________________FILE PERJURY CASE IN INDIAIn order to sustain and maintain sanctity and solemnity of the proceedings in law courts it is necessary that parties should not make false or knowingly, inaccurate statements or misrepresentation and/or should not conceal material facts with a design to gain some advantage or benefit at the hands of the court, when a court is considered as a place where truth and justice are the solemn pursuits. If any party attempts to pollute such a place by adopting recourse to make misrepresentation and is concealing material facts it does so at its risk and cost._________________Section 132 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872132. Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will criminate.—A witness shall not be excused from answering any question as to any matter relevant to the matter in issue in any suit or in any civil or criminal proceeding, upon the ground that the answer to such question will criminate, or may tend directly or indirectly to criminate, such witness, or that it will expose, or tend directly or indirectly to expose, such witness to a penalty or forfeiture of any kind:(Proviso) —Provided that no such answer, which a witness shall be compelled to give, shall subject him to any arrest or prosecution, or be proved against him in any criminal proceeding, except a prosecution for giving false evidence by such an answer.__________________Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as a false declaration made during a judicial proceeding or under any other legal obligation.Section 193 punishes the former for a maximum period of 7 years and the latter for 3 years.IPC S. 195 Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of an offence punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment for 7 Years or upwardsIPC 196. Using Evidence Known To Be False.IPC199. False Statement Made In Declaration Which Is By Law Receivable As Evidence.____________________CrPC340. Procedure In Cases Mentioned In Section 195If you have any evidence to prove that pleading is false and vexatious then you can move an application under section 340 of the code of criminal procedure and invite the attention of the court towards false statements made in the pleading. If the court finds that statements are false and have been deliberately made with the intention to mislead the court or get any favourable order by keeping the court in dark then the court will initiate criminal proceeding against him for the offence of perjury which is punishable under Section 193 to 199 of the Indian Penal Code.____________________PROSECUTION OF PERJURY:1. Legal obligation to state the truth2. The making of a false statement.3. Belief in its falsity.CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING OFFENSE:(a) The statement is false(b) The person 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. The 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) A false statement made by a person who is --a) Bound by an oathb) By an express provision of lawc) A declaration which a person is bound by law to make on any subjectd) Which statement or declaration is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true.2. An oath must be administered by a person of a competent authority.The authority must be competent to administer the oath. The proceedings where an oath is administered must be sanctioned by law.3. Express provisions of the law include—Plaints, Written Statements, and other pleadings.a) CPC casts a legal duty to speak the truthb) Verification of pleadings is a legal obligation.4. Affidavits are a declaration made under oath.5. A statement could be verbal or otherwise.a) A statement that he believes a thing which he does not believe.b) A statement that he knows a thing which he does not know.c) A 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.Due to this the related other section which can be used are:IPO 191: Giving false evidence, judicial perjuryIPO 192: Fabricating false evidenceIPO 193: punishment for offenses u/s 191 & 192 IPOIPO 194 & 195: Aggravated forms of offenses u/s 191 & 192 IPOIPO 196 to 200: Offenses punishable in the same way as giving or fabricating false evidenceIPO 201 to 229: Offenses against public justiceOFFENCES U/S 195 CrPC:(a) IPO 172 to IPO 188 relate to contempts of the lawful authority of public servants and also of the attempt to commit or conspiracy to commit such offense or abatement thereof.(b) IPO 193, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211 and 228, when such offense is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any court.CrPC 195:Generally any person can lodge a complaint of an offence and set the law in motion. An exception to this rule is offences Specified u/s 195 CrPC. Section 195 lays down rules to be followed by the court to take cognizance of an offence specified under it. Court has full discretion in deciding whether any prosecution is necessary or not.CONSIDERATIONS FOR SANCTIONING PROSECUTION:a) Administration of justice is not hamperedb) Not to be used as a means for wreaking vengeance by peoplec) Every incorrect or false statement does not make it incumbent upon the court to order a prosecution.d) Judicial discretion to order prosecution only in the larger interest of the administration of justice.e) When police find that complaint was false and the case is cancelled u/s 173 CrPC, the police can start proceeding u/s 211 IPO against the person who lodged a false complaint.CrPC 340:Section 340 CrPC lays down directions for the guidance of the court which desires to initiate prosecution in respect of an offence covered under IPO 195.The court can take action and make a complaint to concerned magistrate u/s 340 either suo-motu or on an application made to it on that behalf.Sanction of the public servant court is a must for offenses in(a) under Criteria for establishing the offence. Sanction of the court is a must for offenses in(b). under Criteria for establishing the offense. Any Civil, Revenue or criminal court can proceed under this section. The person against who proceedings are initiated has no right to participate in preliminary Inquiry. The trial for the offence will be held by the magistrate based on a complaint by the court acting u/s 340 sanctioning prosecution. The order is appealable only once and no second appeal or revision lies.REQUIREMENTS FOR STARTING PROSECUTION:The court is not bound to start prosecution. Only if it is expedient in the interest of justice and affects the administration of justice. Contradictory evidence is not enough for prosecution. Offence must have been committed intentionally. Perjury should appear to be deliberate and conscious. Conviction is reasonably probable or likely. Reasonable foundation for the charge must exist. The statement given by complainant in FIR u/s 154 cannot be the basis of prosecution u/s 340. Statements given to police u/s 161 are not evidence.PROCEDURE:Receive application or suo motu – the application can be filed by a person not a party to the proceedings in relation to which the offense is committed. The court where application is filed only decides if inquiry should be made Hold preliminary inquiry (not essential in law). Record findings. Make a complaint in writing - include offence, facts on which it is based and evidence available for proving it. The judge has to sign the complaint himself. Forward it to a first-class Magistrate having jurisdiction.IPC 192:No condition to be bound by oath. Reasonable prospect of proceedings and intention to use the fabricated evidence in such proceedings. Proceedings need not be in progress. The material omission is made in an entry or a statement Affidavit- making a document containing false statements to be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding.Criteria:Particular Intention that false documents so made should appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding. Reasonable prospect of using the document is sufficient to establish the offence. Should be material to the result of the proceedings- Judge is made to entertain an erroneous opinion touching nay point material to the result of such proceeding based on such fabricated evidence.IPO 199: False statement made in declaration which is by law receivable as evidence.IPO 200: Using as true such declaration knowing it to be false.

Thanks for the A2A , Sameer. Since so many credits are in question and Aakanksha and Yegana have covered quite a few of the legal maxims used commonly already, so apart from legal maxims, I’ll also include terms that make legalese legalese.1. ab initio-from the beginning.2. actus reus- Part of what proves criminal liability. You must have heard of Mens rea already which means the intention behind doing something. Actus reusdeals with the ‘act’ itself.3. ad hominem-Attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. Not allowed in Court.4. affidavit-Oh we all know this one!5. animus possidendi – It means intention to possess. In order to claim possessory rights, an individual must establish physical control of the res and the intention to possess. Mostly used while dealing with Transfer of Property Act.6. bona fide-Means in good faith. I thought this was English for a very long time.7. Caveat- Basically means a warning. Used in clauses. I recall the erstwhile editor of The Statesman, C.R. Irani used to write a weekly column by the same name.8. sine qua non – Means an indispensable and essential action, condition, or ingredient. My Copyright professor used it very often, now I use it often too.9. de jure- Cousin brotherof de facto, it means something that is established in law, whether or not it is true in general practice Concerning the law.10. de minimis– See de minimis rule of Copyright. Enuf Said!11. dictum- A statement given some weight or consideration due to the respect given the person making it. Statements by Learned Hand, Justice Frankfurter, Anton Scalia , I am just throwing names.12. ejusdem generis-It is one the aids to interpretation of Statutes. It states that when a limited list of specific things also includes a more general class, that the scope of that more general class shall be limited to other items more like the specific items in the list. For example, where "cars, motor bikes, motor powered vehicles" are mentioned, the word "vehicles" would be interpreted in a limited sense (therefore vehicles cannot be interpreted as including airplanes).13. ex parte- A decision reached, or case brought, by or for one party without the other party being present.14. habeas corpus-It’s a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the High Courts are given power issue certain writs. Habeas corpusis one of them. It is used to challenge the legality of detention. Orders the detaining party to "have the (living) body" of the detained brought before the court where the detention will be investigated. See Which Indian Supreme Court decisions have been generally recognized as being poor legal decisions?15. ibid. – Essential for writing legal research papers. We use it to increase the number of citations. Kidding.16. in curia- In court17. in loco parentis– Means In the place of a parent, basically a guardian.18. in pari materiaIn the same matter19. in re- Means in the matter . The name of cases begin with In Re at times.20. in toto- Just mentioned cause my constitutional law professor used itfrequently to describe things like, we were absent from the class in toto. Hope you get the drift.21. ipso facto-Means by the fact itself. Use of this will earn you brownie points in case of an argument.22. jus cogens-One of the principles of International Law. Refers to laws that bear no deviation, and do not require treaties to be in effect. An example is law prohibiting genocides and crimes against humanity.23. lacunae-Oh well, everyone has those!24. lis pendensSuit pending25. locus standi– Basically determines why a particular person is coming to court to seek relief. What is his interest?26. male fide- Those intentions!27. modus operandi– You already know this one.28. mutatis mutandis In simple words, having been changed that which needed to be changed. A caution to a reader when using one example to illustrate a related but slightly different situation. The caution is that the reader must adapt the example to change what is needed for it to apply to the new situation.29. non liquet- It is not clear type of verdict where positive guilt or innocence cannot be determined. Also called "not proven" in legal systems with such verdicts.30. noscitur a sociis- Also a statute of interpretation. An ambiguous word or term can be clarified by considering the whole context in which it is used, without having to define the term itself. When a word is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined by reference to the rest of the statute.31. obiter dictum-Not the judgment but the observations made by the court. Sometimes more important than the ratio decidendi. See No. 36.32. pacta sunt servanda – Also part of International Law . Basically means agreements must be kept33. per curiamA decision delivered by a multi-judge panel, such as an appellate court, in which the decision is said to be authored by the court itself, instead of situations where those individual judges supporting the decision are named.34. pro bono- You’ve seen way too many episodes of Boston Legal already. Need I explain it?35. quo warranto-Also a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. The meaning of the term Quo Warranto is ‘by what authority’. The writ of quo warranto may be issued against a person holding a public office or governmental privilege. The issue of summon is followed by legal proceedings, during which an individual's right to hold an office or governmental privilege is challenged.36. ratio decidendiThe point in a legal proceeding, or the legal precedent so involved, which led to the final decision being what it was.37. res judicata- A matter that has been finally adjudicated, meaning no further appeals or legal actions by the involved parties is now possible. Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code.38. sui generis-When a special and unique interpretation of a case or authority is found to be necessary. When citing cases and other authorities, lawyers and judges may refer to "a sui generis case", or "a sui generis authority", meaning it is a special one confined to its own facts, and therefore may not be of broader application.39. supra-Also used to increase the number of citations in a legal research paper like Ibid. To know how to use it in conversations which will result in hilarious effects, PM me.

YES YOU CAN.From sec 22 -25 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908 deal with TRANSFER OF SUIT.Sections 22 to 25 enact the law as regards transfer and withdrawal of suits, appeals and other proceedings from one court to another. Section 22 and 23 enable a defendant to apply for transfer of a suit while Section 24 and 25 empower certain courts to transfer any suits , appeal or other proceeding either or an application made by any party or by the court suo motu.Now here as per your question you want to transfer a civil case from one state to another state you may need to focus on section 25 .Language of Section 25 is ;-Power of Supreme Court to transfer suits, etc.—(1)On the application of a party, and after notice to the parties, and after hearing such of them as desire to be heard, the Supreme Court may, at any stage, if satisfied that an order under this section is expedient for the ends of justice, direct that any suit, appeal or other proceeding be transferred from a High Court or other Civil Court in one State to a High Court or other Civil Court in an other State.(2) Every application under this section shall be made by a motion which shall be supported by an affidavit.(3) The Court to which such suit, appeal or other proceeding is transferred shall, subject to any special directions in the order of transfer, either retry it or proceed from the stage at which it was transferred to it.(4) In dismissing any application under this section, the Supreme Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum, not exceeding two thousand rupees, as it considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case.(5) The law applicable to any suit, appeal or other proceeding transferred under this section shall be the law which the Court in which the suit, appeal or other proceeding was originally instituted ought to have applied to such suit, appeal or proceeding.Now it is very clear that when anybody wants to get his case transfer from one state to another then sec 25 applies in which one must move application before the Supreme Court. Now lets talk about what our Constitution says about the same.Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to withdraw and transfer cases under Article 139-A of the Indian Constitution:Where cases including the same or considerably the same questions of law are pending in the Supreme Court and one or more High Courts or, before two more High Courts, and the Supreme Court is satisfied on its own motion or on an application made by the Attorney General for India or by a party to any such case, that such questions are significant questions of general importance Article 139-A(1) of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to "withdraw" the cases pending before the High Courts to itself and discard all the cases without anyone else's interference. This provision is regularly invoked when the constitutional validity of a central enactment is tested. Article 139-A (2) empowers the Supreme Court if it seems that it is convenient so to accomplish the ends of the justice, to transfer any case, appeal or different proceedings pending before of any High Court to whatever other High Court.Now it is very important to mention here that such application of transfer must have very strong grounds . The jurisdiction under this section must be exercised with extreme care , caution and circumspection . The search should be for justice and the court must be satisfied that justice could more likely be done by transferring the case. Whether justice can be served by transferring the case from one court to another is a question depends upon the facts of each case.For any further help let me know.regards,Advocate Neha Roy ChoudhuryAllahabad High Court