Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

24. It has already been held above that the charges u/s 467/468 IPC framed against accused Sameer Bhai Kishore cannot be sustained. However, it still has to be seen whether any minor offence is made out against accused Sameer Bhai Kishore on basis of the facts which have already been proved by the prosecution. Ld. APP for the State submits that the accused can be convicted for the offence u/s 471/474 IPC even though the charge has been framed u/s 467/468 IPC as all the facts required for proving the offence u/s 471/474 IPC have already been proved by the prosecution. The relevant Section for the said purpose is Section 222 Cr.P.C. which is being reproduced below:

25. In the matter at hand, the charge has been framed u/s 467/468 IPC. As already discussed above, the ingredients for an offence to be made out u/s 467 IPC are that it has to be proved that forgery of a document has been committed, which purports to be a valuable security or will. For an offence to be made out u/s 468 IPC, it has to be established that forgery was committed for the purposes of cheating. Therefore, the committing of forgery by the accused is imperative in both the said sections. On the other hand, for an offence to be made out u/s 471 IPC, it has to be established that the accused fraudulently or dishonestly used as genuine any document or electronic record, which he knew or had reason to believe was forged. Similarly, for an offence to be made out u/s 474 IPC, it has to be established that the accused had in his possession any document or any electronic record described in section 466 or 467 IPC, knowing the same to be forged and intending that the same shall be used fraudulently or dishonestly as genuine. From a bare perusal of Sections MANSI FIR No. 158/2004 State Vs Sameer Bhai Kishore Bhai Desai PS Pratap Nagar Pg No. 25 of 28 MALIK 467/468 IPC on one hand and Sections 471/474 IPC on the other hand, it is clearly discernible that the ingredients of section 471/474 IPC are not the same as section 467/468 IPC. The key ingredient of section 471 IPC is fraudulently or dishonestly using of any document or any electronic record knowing the same to be forged. Similarly, Section 474 IPC is only established when the accused has in his possession any document or electronic record knowing it to be forged and intending that the same shall be fraudulently or dishonestly be used as genuine. Using/intending to use a forged document as genuine is therefore essential for the offences to be made out u/s 471/474 IPC, which is not required for the offences u/s 467/468 IPC to be made out.

26. From the aforesaid discussion, it is amply clear that the ingredients required to prove an offence u/s 467/468 IPC are different from the ingredients required to establish an offence u/s 471/474 IPC. However, as the accused Sameer Bhai Patel has not been charged with the offences u/s 471/474 IPC, he cannot be now convicted of the said offences even though they may be made out in the matter. The court is of the view that the offences u/s 471/474 IPC are distinct offences from the offences u/s 467/468 IPC and cannot be categorized as minor offences as the ingredients required to make out these offences are different. Therefore, Section 222 Cr.P.C. does not help the case of the prosecution and the accused cannot be now convicted under Section 471/474 IPC without charges under the said sections being framed against him. The trial in the present matter has been ongoing since the past 20 years and thus the Court is of the view that the present litigation be now taken to its conclusion without further delay on basis of the charges already framed MANSI FIR No. 158/2004 State Vs Sameer Bhai Kishore Bhai Desai PS Pratap Nagar Pg No. 26 of 28 MALIK and the material already on record..