JUDGMENT 1. In this case the Petitioners have been convicted of the offence of fabricating false evidence under sec. 193, I.P.C. The facts found in the case are: That certain persons caused a false entry to be made in the register of Mahomedan marriages. The part taken by the accused was that Mahomed Siddiq attended before the Registrar purporting to be the bridegroom in a marriage, while the second accused purported to prove that another person present had authority to act for the bride. It also appears from the findings that if the marriage had really taken place, which it is found had not, it would have enured to the benefit of the accused and other persons concerned in the making of the false entry. 2. The question is whether these facts bring the case under sec. 193, I.P.C. Sec. 193 consists of two paragraphs. The first applies to intentionally giving false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding or fabricating false evidence for the purpose of being used at any stage of a judicial proceeding. The giving of false evidence in a judicial proceeding plainly contemplates a judicial proceeding being in existence; while fabricating false evidence for the purpose of using it at any stage of a judicial proceeding contemplates some definite judicial proceeding being foreseen. Neither of these was the case in the present instance. 3. We have therefore to consider whether the case comes under the second paragraph of sec. 193 which relates to a person intentionally fabricating false evidence in any other case. In order to see what fabricating false evidence means we have to look back to sec. 192; and in order to substantiate such fabrication it appears necessary that there should be an intention on the part of the fabricator that the entry or statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding or other proceedings of the like nature. In the present case there is no finding as to the intention with which this false entry was made and it may very well be that the false entry would be useful in other cases than those mentioned in sec. 192. This will appear plain if we consider that such document would be useful in preventing any judicial proceeding being brought. 4. Many other similar cases might very well be supposed. 192. This will appear plain if we consider that such document would be useful in preventing any judicial proceeding being brought. 4. Many other similar cases might very well be supposed. It might for one thing prevent the marriage of the girl with any other person, irrespective of any proceeding mentioned in sec. 192. Sec. 193 in fact provides for special cases of fabrication of false document, and it is not proved that a special case arises on the facts before us. The result is that on the findings before us this offence has not been proved against the Petitioner. The rule is therefore made absolute and the conviction and sentence are set aside. The Petitioner will be discharged from his bail-bond.