False claims and false evidence may justify prosecution notice where repeated refund claims and misleading affidavits are shown.

Prima facie false claims already satisfied in earlier proceedings, repeated refund demands on the same basis, and false averments denying prior petitions were treated as sufficient material to indicate possible fraudulent conduct, false evidence, and an attempt to obtain money not due. On that footing, notice was directed to explain why prosecution should not be launched for offences relating to false evidence, false claim in court, and attempt to commit such offence.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts disclosed, a show cause notice should be issued for prosecution in respect of false claims and false statements on oath.

Analysis: The material placed before the Court showed, at least prima facie, that the petitioner had made claims already satisfied in earlier proceedings, had sought refund on the same claims again, and had made false averments denying prior petitions. The Court treated these facts as sufficient to indicate possible fraudulent conduct, attempt to obtain money not due, and perjury. On that basis, the Court directed issuance of notice calling upon the petitioner to explain why prosecution should not be launched for offences concerning false evidence, false claim in court, and attempt to commit such offence.

Conclusion: A show cause notice for prosecution was directed to be issued under the identified penal provisions.

---