Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

48. Before discussing further, it would be relevant to discuss the law relating to forgery. Section 471 IPC provides punishment for using as genuine a forged document or electronic record. Section 468 IPC provides punishment for committing forgery, intending that the document forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating. Section 467, IPC provides punishment for forging a valuable security, will etc. Section 463 IPC defines forgery while Section 464 IPC defines making a false document. These two Sections read as under :-

49. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sheila Sebastian vs R. Jawaharaj, Crl. Appeal nos. 359-360/2010, decided on 11 May, 2018, has discussed the law relating to forgery. It has been held as under :-

"19. A close scrutiny of the aforesaid provisions makes it clear that, Section 463 defines the offence of forgery, while Section 464 substantiates the same by providing an answer as to when a false document could be said to have been made for the purpose of committing an offence of forgery under Section 463, IPC. Therefore, we can safely deduce that Section 464 defines one of the ingredients of forgery i.e., making of a false document. Further, Section 465 provides punishment for the commission of the offence of forgery. In order to sustain a conviction under Section 465, first it has to be proved that forgery was committed under Section 463, implying that ingredients under Section 464 should also be satisfied. Therefore unless and untill ingredients under Section 463 are satisfied a person cannot be convicted under Section 465 by solely relying on the ingredients of Section 464, as the offence of forgery would remain incomplete.

"22. In Md. Ibrahim (supra), this Court had the occasion to examine forgery of a document purporting to be a valuable security (Section 467, IPC) and using of forged document as genuine (Section 471, IPC). While considering the basic ingredients of both the offences,this Court observed that to attract the offence of forgery as defined under Section 463, IPC depends upon creation of a document as defined under Section 464, IPC. It is further observed that mere execution of a sale deed by claiming that property being sold was executant's property, did not amount to commission of offences punishable FIR No. 223/2001 PS : Preet Vihar State Vs. Mohd. Yusuf.

51. In the present case also, even though it is shown that the accused had falsely shown himself owner of the shop in question in the abovesaid documents. However, he did not claim that he was someone else nor did he claim that he was authorised by someone else. In these circumstances, the FIR No. 223/2001 PS : Preet Vihar State Vs. Mohd. Yusuf. CNR No. DLET-02-000170-2003 : CR Case no.3354/2016 documents can not be called false documents as defined under Section 464, IPC. Once it is shown that the documents are not false documents, there is no forgery, and, if there is no forgery, then Sections 467, 468, or Section 471 of the IPC are not attracted. The accused, therefore, can not be held liable for any of those offences.