Forgery in appeal papers led to a criminal complaint and preservation of records for investigation.

On comparison of signatures, the Tribunal found a prima facie case that the earlier appeal and stay application were not signed by the person appearing before it. The verification in those papers was treated as false, and the appeal memo and stay application were viewed as fabricated in the name of the stated proprietor. As the conduct disclosed apparent offences of false evidence, forgery, use of forged documents as genuine, and criminal conspiracy, the Tribunal directed the Registrar to lodge a complaint and preserve the record for investigation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the signatures on the earlier appeal and stay application were forged and whether the Tribunal should direct initiation of criminal proceedings and preservation of records.

Analysis: On comparison of the signatures in the earlier appeal and stay application with those admitted in the present proceedings, the Tribunal found a prima facie case that the earlier papers were not signed by the person appearing before it. The verification in those papers was treated as false, and the appeal memo and stay application were viewed as having been fabricated in the name of the stated proprietor. The Tribunal held that the conduct disclosed apparent offences relating to false evidence, forgery, use of forged documents as genuine, and criminal conspiracy, and therefore directed the Registrar to lodge a complaint and secure the record for investigation.

Conclusion: The Tribunal found a prima facie case of forgery and fabrication in the earlier appeal papers and ordered a criminal complaint and preservation of the records.

---