petition for perjury case

 

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE CIVIL JUDGE (S. D.) FIROZABAD

C. C. NO.                    of 2013

Pankaj Agrawal S/o Late Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal R/o Hello Lamps India, Bhau Ka Nagla, Agra Road, Firozabad – U.P.

…………………..….Applicant

Versus

Rajiv Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal R/o Shilko Industries, B. K. Glass Wali Gali, Bhau Ka Nagla, Agra Road, Firozabad – U.P.

                                                                   ………………...….Respondent

PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION U/S 340 (1) of Cr. P. C, 1973 FOR THE ACT OF PERJURY COMITTED BY THE DEFENDANT IN FIROZABAD COURT.

Sir

The Applicant named above, do hereby state on solemn affirmation as under:-

1.     That the Applicant is the sole plaintiff of O. S. No. 418/2009 and he has filed this suit under the name & style ‘Pankaj Kumar Agrawal V/S Rajiv Kumar Agrawal and Others’ on 07-12-2009 in the Court of Hon’ble Civil Judge (S. D.), Firozabad for the partition of ancestral property.

2.     That after appearing in this case the Respondent Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal cleverly compromised the matter out of court and requested to the Applicant to withdraw his suit from the Court resulting which the Applicant moved one application on 11.10.2012 and second application on 06.05.2013 before the Court to withdraw his suit.

3.     That during the pendency of these applications, the Respondent refused to follow the compromise and loudly said that the applicant should not dare to demand his share so seeing the behavior of the Respondent, the applicant directed his counsel on 11.07.2013 to ‘Not press’ both the applications and continue the suit in furtherance of getting reliefs as prayed. But on 11.07.2013, the Court did not dispose the applications dated 11.10.2012 and 06.05.2013 and fixed 04.09.2013 as next date for hearing.

4.     That on 27.07.2013 Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal presented an application to the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) Firozabad that the above said suit of the applicant should be decided in the Lok Adalat which is going to organize on 28.07.2013 but remarkably this application does not bear the signature of applicant. On the basis of application dated 27.07.2013 the case was heard on 28.07.2013 in the Lok Adalat and in this Lok Adalat Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal moved a forged and fabricated application drawn by him under the forged signature of applicant, i. e. the application was not signed by the applicant but Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal made the signature of applicant.

5.     That in this application Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal wrote that he (Pankaj Kumar Agrawal) was willing to withdraw the suit so on the basis of this fabricated and forged application the Court passed an order for return the suit. This forged application does not bear the attestation and verification of counsel. Besides this the order sheet also bears the false signature of the applicant made by Sri Rajiv Kumar Agrawal.

6.     That the Respondent is a well qualified, educated and literate person having suitable qualification to understand the content of any application and its fate but he has willfully with clear oblique intentions to harass the present applicant and to mislead the court of law in the imaginary notion that court of law cannot come to know what he has substantiated in the court of law. There by misleading the court of law and playing pranks of judicial institution and false applications in the court of law, and harassing innocent Applicant, and interfering in the administration of justice and is using court of law as a tool.

7.     That heavy fine should be levied and stern action and punishment should be provided to restrain the Respondent from making such false allegations and applications against the Applicant.

8.     The facts mentioned and maintained by the Respondent in his fabricated applications are contrary to the will of applicant and have changed the facts according to the need of context and sense of urgency and has manipulated facts with willful intention, while submitting information to the Ld Court in case filed by the Applicant. The facts are imaginary and false, and this amounts to grave misuse of court of law and interference in the administration of justice and denying the liberty to the real victims, here the Applicant.

9.     That the person who uses the court of law for his private and personal vendetta should be punished severely so as to curb the menace of misusing and harassing the innocent Applicant and more so his act is contrary to the submissions to this honorable court, which are perjurious in nature. Thereby not only infringing rights of applicant but also willful interference in the administration of justice and disturbing the serenity of the stream of justice.

10.                        That the material on record before this Hon’ble Court prima facie proves that the applicant has committed the act of perjury in his submission and the same has been described in detail.

PRAYER

It is therefore, most humbly prayed by the respondent that: -

A.   By considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Applicant most humbly prays that this Hon’ble court be pleased to kindly charge the Respondent and commit the matter to the concerned Magistrate court to prosecute the Respondent for the act of perjury in his application;

B.   Initiate the proceedings of perjury for infringement of rights and harassment, of Applicant and thereby playing pranks;

C.   Kindly pass such other suitable orders as may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

 APPLICANT

 

    (PANKAJ AGRAWAL)

V E R I F I C A T I O N: - I, Pankaj Agrawal S/o Late Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal R/o Hello Lamps India, Bhau Ka Nagla, Agra Road, Firozabad, the Applicant above named do hereby state and declare on solemn affirmation that whatever stated in the above Application is true and correct as per my knowledge and belief and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

Solemnly affirmed at Firozabad on this _____day of September, 2013.

  APPLICANT

 

    (PANKAJ AGRAWAL)

THROUGH

 

(COUNSEL)