Perjury proceedings require clear wilful falsehood; omission and pleadings here did not show mala fides or intent to mislead.

Allegations that the liquidator made false statements in contempt pleadings did not justify perjury proceedings or disciplinary reference, because the record did not show a deliberate or wilful attempt to mislead the Adjudicating Authority. Repeated efforts to gain access to the corporate debtor's office during the COVID period, correspondence with the KMPs about the keys, and uncertainty over possession of the keys and ownership of the premises supported the view that the omission to implead the appellant in the Section 19 application was not mala fide. The statements in the contempt pleadings were therefore insufficient to attract the criminal or tribunal framework for perjury.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in declining to initiate perjury proceedings and to refer the matter for disciplinary action against the liquidator on the allegation that false statements were made in the pleadings filed in the contempt proceedings.

Analysis: The appeal turned on whether the liquidator's omission to implead the appellant in the Section 19 application, and the statements made in the later pleadings, disclosed a deliberate and wilful attempt to mislead the Adjudicating Authority. The record showed repeated efforts by the liquidator to secure access to the corporate debtor's office premises during the COVID period, correspondence with the KMPs regarding the keys, and uncertainty as to the exact person in possession of the keys and the ownership status of the premises. In that background, the omission to implead the appellant in the Section 19 application was not shown to be actuated by mala fides. The statements in the contempt pleadings were also not of such a nature as to justify initiation of perjury proceedings under the applicable criminal and tribunal framework.

Conclusion: The refusal to initiate perjury proceedings and to make a reference for disciplinary action was upheld, and the allegation of perjury was rejected.

---