Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Forgery of document in S K Pandit vs Chandraprakash D Deo on 7 June, 2019Matching Fragments
12. The other offence alleged against the petitioner is forgery of document.
13. Section 463 I.P.C defines forgery and Section 464 I.P.C deals with making a false document. Section 463 provides that whoever makes any false document or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery. In order to constitute forgery, the first essential condition is that the accused should have made a false document. The false document must be made with an intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any class of public or to any community. The definition of the offence of forgery declares the offence to be completed when a false document or false part of a document is made with specified intention. In a case of forgery, the questions are: (i) is the document false (ii) is it made by the accused and (iii) is it made with an intent to defraud. Every forgery postulates a false document either in whole or in part, however, small.
15. Making any false document is sine qua non to attract the offence of forgery. In Sheila Sebastian v. Jawaharaj :
AIR 2018 SC 2434, the Apex Court has held that the definition of "false document" is a part of the definition of "forgery" and both must be read together. A person is said to make a false document or record if he satisfies one of the four conditions as noticed hereinbefore and provided for under Section 464 I.P.C.Crl.M.C.No.5542/2014 12