Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

22

13. The other allegation is forgery, as obtaining under Section 468 of the IPC. Forgery is alleged to have happened in the year 2016 concerning villa No.21. The complaint is registered in 2022.

The parties have also initiated arbitration proceeding by issuing notices invoking the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

It is also averred that commercial O.S. is also pending between the parties. In the teeth of the aforesaid facts, if any indulgence is shown it would run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of MITESH KUMAR J. SHA V. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS1 wherein the Apex Court has held as follows:

Offence punishable under Section 468, IPC.

(i) Commission of forgery, (ii) that he did so intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating.

Offence punishable under Section 420, IPC.

To constitute the said offence there must be deception i.e., the accused must have deceived someone; that by such deception the accused must induce a person (i) to deliver any property; or (ii) to make, alter, destroy a whole or part of the valuable security or anything which is signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable property; or (iii) that the accused must have done so dishonestly. The offence punishable under Section 120B, IPC, to constitute criminal conspiracy, there must be agreement between two or more persons. The agreement should be to do or cause to be done some illegal act, or some act which is not illegal, by illegal means, provided that where the agreement is other than one to commit an offence, the prosecution must further prove; or (iv) that some act besides the agreement was done by or more of the parties in pursuance of it.