Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9.9 In fact according to clause 36 the bank guarantee could be encashed if any such false information/document or forgery came to the knowledge/notice even after the award of the contract or the execution of the above. The relevant clauses are provided as under:-

"36.2 In case, the information/document furnished by the vendor/contractor forming basis of evaluation of his bid is found to be false/forged after the award of the contract, Owner shall have full right to terminate the contract and get the remaining job executed at the risk & cost of such vendor/contractor without any prejudice to other rights available to Owner under the contract such as forfeiture of CPBG/security deposit, withholding of payment etc. 36.3 In case, this issue of submission of false documents comes to the notice after execution of work, Owner shall have full right to forfeit any amount due to the vendor/contractor along with forfeiture of CPBG/security deposit furnished by the vendor/contractor.

9.32 What is forgery and what amounts to making a false document has been defined u/s 463 and 464 of Indian Penal Code. Section 463 and 464 IPC are reproduced hereunder:-

Section 463 IPC "Forgery.-- [Whoever makes any false documents 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."

21. It is observed in the case Md. Ibrahim and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Anr., (2009) 8 SCC 751 that-

"a person is said to have made a `false document', if
(i) he made or executed a document claiming to be someone else or authorised by someone else; or
(ii) he altered or tampered a document; or
(iii) he obtained a document by practicing deception, or from a person not in control of his senses."

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 under Sections 467 and 471, IPC even if title of property did not vest in the executant.

26. The definition of "false document" is a part of the definition of "forgery". Both must be read together. 'Forgery' and 'Fraud' are essentially matters of evidence which could be proved as a CS 450/2016 M/s Suvidha Engineers India Pvt Ltd Vs. M/s Engineers India Ltd. Pages 42/55 fact by direct evidence or by inferences drawn from proved facts. In the case in hand, there is no finding recorded by the trial Court that the respondents have made any false document or part of the document/record to execute mortgage deed under the guise of that 'false document'. Hence, neither respondent no.1 nor respondent no.2 can be held as makers of the forged documents. It is the imposter who can be said to have made the false document by committing forgery. In such an event the trial court as well as appellate court misguided themselves by convicting the accused. Therefore, the High Court has rightly acquitted the accused based on the settled legal position and we find no reason to interfere with the same.