https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168394 On allegations of tampering, forged affidavits, and altered agreement documents, the Court treated Section 340 CrPC as requiring only a limited prima facie enquiry and consideration of whether prosecution was expedient in the interests of justice. On the forensic report and surrounding circumstances, it found prima facie erasure, substitution of figures and words, and false statements about addresses. The objection that the alleged forgery predated the proceedings did not bar action, because the disputed documents were produced in court and the false affidavits independently attracted the Court's power. A complaint was directed against the persons specifically implicated, while it was declined against the person for whom no specific allegation was made. en-us Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:24:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168394 On allegations of tampering, forged affidavits, and altered agreement documents, the Court treated Section 340 CrPC as requiring only a limited prima facie enquiry and consideration of whether prosecution was expedient in the interests of justice. On the forensic report and surrounding circumstances, it found prima facie erasure, substitution of figures and words, and false statements about addresses. The objection that the alleged forgery predated the proceedings did not bar action, because the disputed documents were produced in court and the false affidavits independently attracted the Court's power. A complaint was directed against the persons specifically implicated, while it was declined against the person for whom no specific allegation was made. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168394