https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113238 A complaint alleging fabrication of a commissioning report disclosed a prima facie case under sections 192 and 199 IPC against the company because the pleaded facts suggested a false record was made or tendered in arbitral proceedings and could have affected the tribunal's view on a material point. However, no prima facie liability was shown against the chairman: the complaint lacked specific averments of personal participation, supervision, or causation of the document's tendering, and vicarious liability could not be presumed from office alone. Section 34 also failed because no prior concert or active participation was pleaded. Proceedings continued against the company but were quashed against the chairman. en-us Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 May 2025 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113238 A complaint alleging fabrication of a commissioning report disclosed a prima facie case under sections 192 and 199 IPC against the company because the pleaded facts suggested a false record was made or tendered in arbitral proceedings and could have affected the tribunal's view on a material point. However, no prima facie liability was shown against the chairman: the complaint lacked specific averments of personal participation, supervision, or causation of the document's tendering, and vicarious liability could not be presumed from office alone. Section 34 also failed because no prior concert or active participation was pleaded. Proceedings continued against the company but were quashed against the chairman. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113238