State Of M.P vs Parasram on 4 October, 2005
32. According to him in State v. Parasram, 1964 RLW 501, the
Rajasthan High Court has also held that general allegations and
vague assertions of "forgery" cannot substitute the legal
requirement of identifying the forged document, the person who
made it, and the mens rea involved therein. Applying this line of
reasoning, the applicant contends that, even if there was an
element of misrepresentation in the functioning of M/s. LHMS, the
same cannot automatically invite penal consequences under the
stringent provisions relating to forgery in absence of direct and
cogent material indicating his authorship or active creation of
forged records.