Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(vii). Mohd Ibrahim v/s State of Bihar (2009) 8 SCC 751 (Execution of document not forgery unless false document proved. If forgery not proved, section 471 IPC automatically fails.)
(viii). S. Varadarajan v/s State of Madras AIR 1965 SC 942 (Forgery requires making of false documents).

(x). Rakesh Kumar v/s State (DHC) 2010 SCC online DEL 4315 . (Without original documents forgery cannot be proved and in the said case, neither alleged forged original document was produced before the Hon'ble court nor recovered at the instance of accused persons.

16. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused forged the following documents:

(a). Continuation Discharge Certificates,
(b). Appointment Letters,
(c). Letter of request of M/s. Sreema Marine Services, a non-ex-

istent firm dated 21/03/05 requesting the visa officer of German Embassy to issue transit visas for 2 days for the said applicants.

(d). Letter of invitation from M/s. Atlas Shipping Group located at Caracas, Venezuela.

17. For proving forgery, it was required to be proved that the abovementioned documents are false.

21. In short, 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. The condition thus precedent for forgery is making a false document (or false electronic record or part thereof) which is the main ingredient of offence under Section 467, 468 and 471 IPC. If what is executed is not a false document, there is no forgery.