Affidavits are dealt under Order 19 of the Code. It is a sworn statement made by the person who is aware of the facts and circumstances which have taken place. The person who makes and signs is known as ‘Deponent’. The deponent makes sure that the contents are correct and true as per his knowledge and he thereby concealed no material therefrom. After signing the document, the affidavit must be duly attested by the Oath Commissioner or Notary appointed by the court of law.

The person who gives attestation to the affidavit shall make sure that the sign of the deponent is not forged. The affidavit shall be drafted as per the provisions of the code. It must be paragraphed and numbered properly. 

Even though the “affidavit” has not been defined in the code, it basically means “a sworn statement in writing made specifically under oath or affirmation before an authorized officer or Magistrate.”

Essentials

There are some basic essentials which are required to be fulfilled while submitting the affidavit in the court:

1. It must be a declaration by a person.
2. It shall not have any inferences, it shall contain facts only.
3. It must be in the first person.
4. It must be in writing.
5. It must be statements which are taken under oath or affirmed before any other authorized officer or a Magistrate. 

Contents of affidavit

As per Rule 3, an affidavit shall contain only those facts to which the deponent is aware off as true to his personal knowledge. However, interlocutory applications can be filed wherein he can admit his belief. 

Important points about Affidavits:-

I.  A Court may order that any fact may be proved by affidavit. Ordinarily, a fact has to be proved by oral evidence.

II. The definition of the affidavit is not defined under S. 3 of the Evidence Act. It can be used as evidence only if, for sufficient reason, the court invokes the provisions of Order 19 of the code.

III. Rule 1 is a sort exception to this rule and empowers the court to make an order that any particular fact may be proved by affidavit, subject, however, to the right of the opposite party to have the deponent produced for cross-examination.

IV.  An affidavit should be confined to such facts as the deponent is able to prove to his personal knowledge except on interlocutory applications on which statements of his belief may be admitted. (R. 3)

V. Unless affidavits are properly verified and are in conformity with the rules, they will be rejected by the court. But, instead of rejecting an affidavit, a court may give an opportunity to a  party to file a proper affidavit.

VI. Ordinarily interlocutory applications such as interim injunctions, the appointment of the receiver, etc, can be decided on the basis of an affidavit.

Evidence on affidavit

Affidavits are not regarded as evidence under Section 3 of the Evidence Act. Oral evidence is typically considered by the court when it is necessary to prove the facts. But when the Court determines that it is necessary to issue an order for a specific fact that can be established through affidavit, Rule 1 Order 19 is used. The opposing counsel has the right to cross-examine or reply-in-affidavit if someone submits evidence under affidavit.

In addition, only facts about which the individual giving the affidavit has genuine firsthand knowledge should be included. He must cite the real source if he makes a comment that is not based on his own understanding. The deponent will be advised by the counsel to ensure that he presents facts rather than what he believes.

The court can reject the affidavit if it is not properly verified and not in conformity with the rules of the code. At the same time court can also give an opportunity to the party to file the affidavit properly. 

In the interlocutory applications like interim injunctions, the appointment of receiver, attachment of property wherein the rights of the parties are not determined conclusively, can be decided on the basis of the affidavit.

False affidavit

Filing a false affidavit is illegal according to IPC 1860 Sections 191, 193, 195, and 199. Giving a lenient opinion will diminish the document’s value, hurt the proceedings, and do the parties no justice. The person who submits fraudulent affidavits in a court of law may face criminal contempt of court charges from the court. Public officials who submit fraudulent affidavits face harsh penalties.

In accordance with IPC Section 193:

Anyone who fabricates or willfully provides false testimony during a legal hearing will be sentenced to seven years in jail and a fine;

And in any other situation, anyone who knowingly provides or fabricates false evidence faces a fine and a period of imprisonment of either kind that may last up to three years.

Conclusion

The CPC’s procedures are so crucial that if they are not followed correctly, the parties could suffer. Under Orders 11, 12, 13, and 19, the court has the ability to issue whatever order it sees fit to decide a case equitably. The parties must also abide by the timelines and processes specified so that the case can be resolved swiftly and efficiently.