AFZAL AND ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

AFZAL AND ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

Police officials (Superintendent of Police, Sub-Inspector, and Assistant Sub-Inspector) deliberately filed and abetted the filing of false affidavits in the Supreme Court to deny wrongful confinement of two minors, and procured forgery of a signature on a judicial document. Their actions amounted to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, and punishable offence under Section 193 IPC. The Court sentenced them appropriately to rigorous imprisonment, emphasizing the seriousness of fabricating evidence and misleading the highest court, and warning that such conduct cannot be tolerated especially by officials tasked with upholding the law.

Parties
Petitioners: Afzal and Anr.; Respondents: State of Haryana and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 January 1996
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (crl.) Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Respondents convicted and sentenced; petition disposed of.
Legal Topics
Perjury, Fabrication of Evidence, Contempt of Court, Wrongful Confinement, Affidavit Forgery
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Contempt of Court Perjury Fabrication of Evidence Wrongful Confinement Affidavit Forgery

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Afzal and Anr.

Petitioners

State of Haryana and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (crl.) Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the filing of false affidavits and fabrication of evidence by police officials amounts to criminal contempt and punishable under Section 193 of IPC and Article 129 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the notary and the process of attestation contributed to the fabrication of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

Police officials (Superintendent of Police, Sub-Inspector, and Assistant Sub-Inspector) deliberately filed and abetted the filing of false affidavits in the Supreme Court to deny wrongful confinement of two minors, and procured forgery of a signature on a judicial document. Their actions amounted to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, and punishable offence under Section 193 IPC. The Court sentenced them appropriately to rigorous imprisonment, emphasizing the seriousness of fabricating evidence and misleading the highest court, and warning that such conduct cannot be tolerated especially by officials tasked with upholding the law.

Court Disposition

Respondents convicted and sentenced; petition disposed of.

Orders

  • Respondent no. 3 (Superintendent of Police) convicted under Section 193 IPC and Article 129 of the Constitution, sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 193 IPC and six months under Article 129 (sentences to run concurrently).
  • Respondent no. 4 (Assistant Sub-Inspector) convicted under Section 193 IPC and sentenced to three months rigorous imprisonment.