The Allahabad High Court has refused to interfere with a Family Court order rejecting a husband’s plea to initiate perjury proceedings against his wife over alleged false statements about his income in a maintenance case.
Background of the Case
The appeal arose from an order dated October 28, 2025, passed by the Family Court in Prayagraj. The husband had moved an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. (now Section 379 BNSS), alleging that his wife falsely stated his monthly income as ₹80,000 and ₹1,25,000 in separate parts of her affidavit.
Read also:- Allahabad HC Dismisses Husband’s Appeal Alleging False Statements in Maintenance Case
He argued that his actual income was only ₹11,000 per month and sought criminal action against her for allegedly making false statements. However, the Family Court rejected the plea, prompting the present appeal before the High Court.
Hearing the matter, Justice Raj Beer Singh noted that proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. are not to be invoked casually. The provision is meant to prevent misuse of court processes and should be applied only when it is necessary in the interest of justice.
“The Court must be satisfied that there is a deliberate and conscious falsehood on a material issue,” the bench observed, emphasizing that not every incorrect statement warrants prosecution.
Read also:- Foreign Arbitral Award Gets Green Signal: Supreme Court Rejects Promoters’ Challenge
The Court further highlighted that in maintenance cases under Section 125 Cr.P.C., it is not uncommon for parties particularly claimants to state higher income figures, which are later tested through evidence during trial.
Importantly, the bench noted that the issue of the husband’s actual income is still pending determination before the Family Court, and the truthfulness of the affidavit will be assessed there.
The High Court reiterated that courts should not become tools for settling personal disputes or vendettas. It stressed that prosecution for perjury should only be initiated in rare cases where conviction appears likely and the falsehood affects the administration of justice.
Read also:- Andhra Pradesh HC Clarifies Inheritance Law: Husband Has No Right Over Wife’s Parental Property
Finding no illegality or perversity in the Family Court’s order, the High Court held that there was no justification to initiate proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C.
“The appeal lacks merit,” the Court concluded, dismissing the case.
Case Details
Case Title: SKD v State of U.P. and Another
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2026
Judge: Justice Raj Beer Singh
Decision Date: March 13, 2026
