Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

                                   Accused is acquitted for


                                              ABHISHEK   KUMAR
                                              KUMAR      Date: 2023.09.23
                                                         18:16:38 +0530




                                             the offence under
                                            Section 474 IPC.
                                            Accused is convicted for
                                            offence under Section 12
                                            PP Act.
                                            Accused is acquitted for
                                            offence under Section
                                            467 IPC and 120B IPC

9. The date of judgment                     : 23.09.2023

13. Section 467 (forgery of valuable security, will etc.), Section 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating) and Section 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronically record) are the aggravated form of the offence of forgery and the condition precedent for these offences is the existence of forgery and the creation of false document or electronic record. Section 470 IPC defines a forged document which is a false document made wholly or in part by forgery. Section 474 IPC provides for the punishment with respect to a false document being in the possession of person and the intention to use the same as genuine fraudulently and dishonestly if the same is found to be of the description as mentioned in Section 466 or 467 IPC. ABHISHEK KUMAR Date: 2023.09.23 PASSPORT ACT

20. Now coming to the second argument of the counsel for the ABHISHEK by ABHISHEK KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2023.09.23 State Vs. Munna Kumar 18:19:21 +0530 Page No.11 of 14 accused that Section 467 or 468 IPC cannot be attracted in the present case for the purposes of Section 474 IPC. He has emphatically argued that the fake visa sticker will not amount to valuable security as per the definition of "valuable security" and Section 468 IPC pertains to the forgery of record or proceeding of or in a Court of justice, register of birth, baptism, marriage or burial or a register kept by a public servant or a certificate or a document made by a public servant in his official capacity. The counsel for the accused has rightly argued in this regard as the visa cannot be termed to be a "valuable security" as per the definition provided under Section 30 IPC. The visa or passport can at max be termed to be a permissive document and not a valuable security. Further, from the bare perusal of Section 466 IPC, one would find that the visa will not fall in the description as enumerated in Section 466 IPC. There is no doubt that the accused was found in possession of the document i.e. fake Malaysian sticker visa but that is not sufficient to convict the accused under Section 474 IPC as the prosecution had to establish that the document involved pertains to the category as described under Section 466 or 467 IPC along with the pre- requisite that the accused had the intention to use the said forged document as genuine. The knowledge or intention is a state of mind which cannot be proved by direct evidence and there is nothing on record which could suggest that the accused was intending to use the fake Malaysian sticker visa as he was not travelling to Malaysia but to Abu Dhabi as per the prosecution story. Even if it is presumed that he had the knowledge or intention to use the fake visa as genuine will not be sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused under Section 474 IPC as ABHISHEK by ABHISHEK KUMAR State Vs. Munna Kumar KUMAR Date: 2023.09.23 Page No.12 of 14 18:19:37 +0530 under that Section the document has to be a document as described in Section 466 or 467 IPC which is not the case in the present matter as it has already been discussed above that fake visa cannot be termed as a valuable security and does not fall within the description of documents as mentioned under Section 466 IPC. Accordingly, accused is acquitted for the offence under Section 474 IPC.

CONCLUSION

23. In the backdrop of above discussion, it is held that prosecution has not been able to establish all the essential ingredients of the offences publishable under Section 417 r/w 511 IPC, Section 468 & 474 IPC for which the accused stands acquitted. However, the prosecution has successfully proved the offence under Section 12 of the Passport Act against the accused. Hence, he is convicted for the said offence.

24. Arguments on the point of sentence be heard accordingly.