we are prima facie satisfied that PW4 in facie curiae has made a false statement on oath and thereby, she has interfered in the administration of justice and hence, we are inclined to initiate Contempt proceedings against PW4.

A trial becomes meaningful only when truth is uttered by a witness....It therefore, becomes imperative that the witness, who deposes before the court speaks the truth. That is the reason why the witness is administered oath before recording the evidence. It is the statement of the witness made on oath and the materials that are collected during the course of trial, which ultimately throws light and enables a Judge to conclude as to whether the prosecution has proved the case or not.

A Court cannot ignore such a conduct which has the propensity to shake the public confidence in Judicial Institutions. If the Courts become lackadaisical in dealing with false statements given by witnesses on oath, it will virtually dislodge the administration of justice and the dignity of the Court. Hence, apart from the alternative remedy of proceeding against the witness for perjury, it is always open to the Higher Courts to initiate contempt proceedings to ensure that the administration of justice remains unpolluted due to false evidence being tendered before the temple of justice.