which deal with forgery read as follows:
"467. Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.--
Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable ... also be liable to fine.
468. Forgery for purpose of cheating.--Whoever
commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic
record forged shall be used
upon administration of
justice. It is possible that such forged document or
forgery may cause a very serious or substantial injury
to a person ... provision would also operate where after
commission of an act of forgery the document is
subsequently produced in court, is capable of
great misuse
deal with forgery. Section 465
directs punishment for forgery and Section 468 directs punishment
for forgery used for the purpose of cheating. They read ... with fine, or with both.
... ... ...
468. Forgery for purpose of cheating.--Whoever commits
forgery, intending that the 3 [document or electronic record forged]
shall
deal with forgery.
Sections 465 , 468 and 471 of the IPC read as follows:
"465. Punishment for forgery.--Whoever
commits forgery shall be punished ... with fine, or with both.
468. Forgery for purpose of cheating.--
Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document
or electronic record forged shall be used
present
petitioners by the respondent No.2 are creation of
forged documents, forgery, impersonation and allegation
of executing a false sale deed with respect ... seen at document No.7. In
the Protest Petition also, the complainant appears to
have given the details of the alleged forgery and the
fraud
government. The aspect of
whether there is any forgery, fabrication of
documents is required to be investigated ... reference made or discussion as regards any
fabrication or forgery of documents. The only
question which was involved in those matters was
whether the power
sale deed dated 25.6.2004. The
petitioner had no knowledge about the forgery of
documents as alleged by the second respondent.
:: 4 ::
In fact the petitioner ... legal notice dated
28.7.2020 issued to the petitioner. When forgery
of document is alleged, it requires investigation
and in fact accused no.1 has given
other accused persons and this petitioner were
indulged in creation of documents by forgery, impersonation,
fabrication of documents and created 67 registered sale
agreements ... requires to be probed and a serious allegation of impersonation,
forgery and fabrication of documents is alleged against the
petitioner herein. Hence
documents, sold the property in
favour of Marappa and Tarun J and on the strength of that
created documents, the purchaser mortgaged those documents ... required with regard to the serious allegation of creation of
documents and forgery and hence it is not a fit case to exercise
the discretion
been disputed. Hence,
there was no need of proving the forgery when the documents
have not been disputed and nothing is elicited in the cross ... documents were not signed
before him and only on perusal of the documents on record, he
came to know that there is a forgery
