Difference between “giving false evidence” and “fabricating false evidence”
(ii) in the case of giving false evidence, the false statement need not be made on a material point but in the case of fabricating the false evidence the evidence fabricated must be on a material point,
(iii) The question of the effect of the evidence on the officer before whom the evidence is given is of no consequence in the case of giving false evidence but this effect is the important point in fabricating false evidence,
(iv) It is essential that there should be a proceeding, judicial or non-judicial, being conducted at the time of fabricating false evidence which only contemplates a reasonable prospect of such a proceeding having regard to the circumstances of the case and that the evidence fabricated is intended to be used in such a proceeding,
(v) Last but not the least, it is the intentional giving of false evidence or the intentional fabrication of false evidence that is punishable.
Intention is the essence of both the offences but there is a difference in the kinds of intention. In the case of giving false evidence only general intention is sufficient, i.e., it must be intentionally given, i.e., given knowing it to be false and with the intention of deceiving the person conducting the proceeding to believe the statement to be true but in the fabrication of false evidence there is a particular intention to use the fabricated evidence in a proceeding and to procure the formation of a wrong view on a material point.
A false entry in his special diary by a Police Investigating Officer is inadmissible in evidence and it cannot as such form the basis of a conviction for fabricating false evidence.
Miscellaneous allied offences. The following offences are punishable in the same way as the giving of false evidence:
Issuing or signing any certificate required by law to be given or signed or by law made evidence of any fact knowing or believing that such certificate is false in any material point (Section 197); using or attempting to use as true a certificate known to be false in material point (Section 198); false statement made in any declaration which touches any material point and which is by law receivable as evidence (Section 199); using as true any such declaration known to be false in any material point (Section 200).
The High Court of Orissa, in Haldhara Karji v. Dileshwar Subudhi, held that a caste certificate issued by the M.L.A. without specifying caste or tribe of the applicant for the purpose of enabling the student to obtain pre-metric scholarship is not a certificate within the meaning of Section 197, I.P.C.