Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Sunday, 20 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-08-18 allowed

State of Goa vs Jose Maria Albert Vales

Bench: 2 — Amitava Roy

In Brief

A Sessions Court directed the prosecution of a witness (respondent) who allegedly gave false evidence under oath, by filing a complaint under Section 193 IPC before a Magistrate. The Trial Magistrate examined some witnesses and framed a charge. The High Court quashed the charge, ruling that because this was a complaint case—not one on police report—the Magistrate should have heard all prosecution evidence before framing any charge, per Section 244 of the Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court held that Section 343(1) mandates treating Section 340 complaints as if instituted on police report. The phrase 'as far as may be' permits limited summary inquiry if materials are insufficient, but does not require the elaborate non-police-report procedure. The High Court's approach violated Section 343(1). The charge framing was sustainable, and the appeal was allowed, directing the Trial Magistrate to proceed from the charge stage."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Perjury and False Evidence Administration of Justice Magistrate Procedure Complaint-based proceedings

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login