Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Nattava Parankusam

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 20, 1913
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/792046

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 195 - Sanction for perjury, not desirable in public interests. - - 4. They should not merely see that there is a good prospect of conviction, but should also consider whether the circumstances are such as to render a prosecution desirahle in the public interests.

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Nattava Parankusam

Legal References

Reported In
(1914)ILR37Mad564

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 195 - sanction for perjury, not desirable in public interests. - - 4. they should not merely see that there is a good prospect of conviction, but should also consider whether the circumstances are such as to render a prosecution desirahle in the public interests.order1. we do not think that this is a case in which the interests of justice call for a prosecution for perjury.2. the accused is a girl of 15 years, and the perjury alleged is in her having made contradictory statements about her mother having wordy quarrels with the man who was keeping the witness. the materiality of the statements is only remote, as suggesting a motive for the offence.3. we often have to notice that courts exercise little discretion in giving sanction to prosecute for giving false evidence.4. they should not merely see that there is a good prospect of conviction, but should also consider whether the circumstances are such as to render a prosecution desirahle in the public interests.5. we do not think the prosecution in this case is desirable. we revoke the sanction.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. We do not think that this is a case in which the interests of justice call for a prosecution for perjury.

2. The accused is a girl of 15 years, and the perjury alleged is in her having made contradictory statements about her mother having wordy quarrels with the man who was keeping the witness. The materiality of the statements is only remote, as suggesting a motive for the offence.

3. We often have to notice that Courts exercise little discretion in giving sanction to prosecute for giving false evidence.

4. They should not merely see that there is a good prospect of conviction, but should also consider whether the circumstances are such as to render a prosecution desirahle in the public interests.

5. We do not think the prosecution in this case is desirable. We revoke the sanction.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial