Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. Statements of the accused(s) recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. Both the accused have stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case. Both the accused chose not to lead defense evidence.

8. Sections 463 and 464 IPC are as under :­ S.463. Forgery.­ Whoever makes any false document or part of a document 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 CBI Vs. Parmod Kumar & Ved Ram, CC No:56/6/2011, RC No:11(S)/92 express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.

CBI Vs. Parmod Kumar & Ved Ram, CC No:56/6/2011, RC No:11(S)/92 S. 468 IPC :: Forgery for purpose of cheating :­ Whoever commits forgery, intending that the [document or Electronic Record forged] shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

10.A bare perusal of the said section clearly reveals that first ingredient of Section 468 IPC is the commission of forgery i.e., as defined in Section 463 IPC. It is only after the forgery has been committed that one would examine the purpose of committing forgery i.e., whether it is done for the purpose of cheating or not? However, in the present case, since the first ingredient is conspicuously missing i.e., commission of forgery, the charge for offence under Section 468 IPC could not be framed.