Official consent for prosecution is not false evidence absent prima facie proof of a knowingly false judicial statement.

Official consent or authorisation for prosecution does not, by itself, constitute false evidence, fabricated evidence, or use of a false document in a judicial proceeding. Applying the ingredients of Sections 191, 192 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code, the Court found no prima facie material that either official had made a knowingly false statement before the Court. As the record disclosed no basis for action under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, no inquiry or complaint could be directed. The application was also treated as an attempt to reopen issues that had already attained finality, and was held misconceived and untenable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the material disclosed a prima facie case for taking action under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the allegation that consent and authorisation granted for prosecution amounted to false evidence or fabrication of false evidence.

Analysis: The allegations were examined against the statutory ingredients of Sections 191, 192 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the scope of Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The consent given by the Attorney General and the authorisation issued by the Chief Vigilance Officer were official acts done for initiating prosecution and, even if challenged as lacking due care or proper application of mind, they did not by themselves constitute false evidence, fabricated evidence, or any false document used in a judicial proceeding. The record disclosed no prima facie material that either respondent gave false evidence before the Court. The application was also viewed as an attempt to reopen issues that had already attained finality in earlier proceedings.

Conclusion: No case was made out for directing an inquiry or filing a complaint under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The allegation did not attract Sections 191, 192 or 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Final Conclusion: The application was found to be misconceived and untenable, and the request to initiate proceedings against the respondents failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Official consent or authorisation for prosecution does not amount to false evidence or fabrication of false evidence under Sections 191 to 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 unless there is prima facie material showing a knowingly false statement made in a judicial proceeding.

---