Queen-Empress vs Ajudhia Prasad

John Edge, Kt., C.J. and Banerji, J.—It is very probable that Ajudhia Prasad''s evidence given in December was false evidence, but it has not been shown to us that it has been proved to have been false evidence. The evidence given in December was inconsistent in material points with the statement made in the report submitted to the Court of Small Causes and made to the Police. But there is nothing to show whether it was the earlier statements which were false or the evidence given on the trial which was false. In our opinion he could not have been convicted u/s 193 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of the statement made to the Police, nor in respect of that made in the report in the Court of Small Causes. We do not think that on either occasion he was fabricating evidence, even assuming that the statements were false. Consequently it became necessary for the prosecution to prove that the evidence given in the trial in December was false. We allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquit Ajudhia Prasad of the charge. The recognizances will be discharged.