https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294658 Where allegations in a complaint, read as a whole, concern false statements, false evidence or fabrication in relation to pending court proceedings, Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 creates a mandatory bar on private cognizance and requires the court to follow Section 340. The Court also held that the disputed debit notes were not shown to be false documents within Sections 463 and 464 of the Indian Penal Code, so the allegations could not be recast as a forgery case to bypass the statutory bar. The original complaints were restored to proceed only through the special procedure under Sections 195 and 340. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Apr 2021 10:17:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294658 Where allegations in a complaint, read as a whole, concern false statements, false evidence or fabrication in relation to pending court proceedings, Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 creates a mandatory bar on private cognizance and requires the court to follow Section 340. The Court also held that the disputed debit notes were not shown to be false documents within Sections 463 and 464 of the Indian Penal Code, so the allegations could not be recast as a forgery case to bypass the statutory bar. The original complaints were restored to proceed only through the special procedure under Sections 195 and 340. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294658