K.T.M.S. Mohammad v. Union of India, 1992 3 SCC 178; Amarsang Nathaji v. Hardik Harshadbhai Patel, 2017 1 SCC 113.
The present case relates to 151 K.R. Pura Legislative Assembly Constituency. We do not see any deliberate falsehood uttered, much less is there any inconsistency. Mere reference to inconsistent statements alone is not sufficient to take action unless, a definite finding is given, they are irreconcilable; one is opposed to the other so as to make one of them deliberately false. The conclusion reached to prosecute, without findings being recorded regarding deliberate or intentional falsehood, cannot be sustained. The factual matrix herein does not indicate, it is expedient in interest of justice to initiate an inquiry and criminal prosecution.
– Hon’ble Justice A.S. Bopanna, N.S. Nandiesha Reddy v. Kavitha Mahesh, [Civil Appeal No. 4821 of 2012].