Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Promissory note forgery in Bharat Hiralal Sheth And Others vs Jaysin Amarsinh Sampat And Another on 14 February, 1997Matching Fragments
10. Explanation 1 makes it further clear that the man's signature in his own name may amount to forgery and from Illustration (e) it is clear that writing a promissory note by A in the circumstances given in the illustration is considered as an act of forgery under the first head of the definition.
11. From these two Illustrations (h) and (e) and Explanation 1 it will be clear that legislature intended to cover cases under the offence of forgery whenever the person was the creator of a document even though the document was made by himself in his own name and signed in his own name. These two illustrations with Explanation 1, therefore, make the scope of the definition "Making a false document" very wide and it cannot be said that part Ist of 464 is the only provision defining words "Making the false document".