Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(ii).He further submitted that even during the course of investigation, a legal opinion was obtained from D.A., who categorically opined that at the most an offence if at all would be under Section 177 IPC, which pertains to furnishing of false information on any subject to any public 8 of 29 CRM-M-38837-2021 (O&M) along with other connected cases -9- servant etc. because even as per the allegations taken on the face of it show that the aforesaid Mohammad Saheed @ Raj Singh @ Raju gave a false information to either the bank officials or the other authorities with regard to the parentage or his name and so far as the petitioner Sucha Singh Maan is concerned, allegedly he had only conspired with him and therefore, on the face of it, at the most offence under Section 177 IPC could have been invoked as it was not a case of any fraud or forgery etc. The D.A. had categorically opined that for an offence under Section 177 IPC, the complainant had no locus standi for lodging a complaint before the police and the police could not have registered an FIR because it was a non-cognizable offence.

Section 465 IPC provides for punishment for forgery, which has been defined under Section 463 IPC, which provides that whoever makes any false document 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.

24 of 29 CRM-M-38837-2021 (O&M) along with other connected cases -25- However, in the present case, there is no allegation pertaining to both the accused for making any false document or any electronic record etc., and therefore, the basic ingredients sine qua non of Section 465 were not fulfilled. Similarly, Section 467 IPC provides for forgery of valuable security, Will etc. and again as per the allegations, the ingredients are not fulfilled. Section 468 IPC provides that whoever commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, will also not be attracted in the present case since Sections 465 & 467 IPC are not attracted. Section 471 IPC provides that whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document or electronic record which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document or electronic record, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document or electronic record. This provision will also not be applicable in the present case since there is no allegation with regard to forgery of any document.