The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the main criminal code of India. It consists of more than 500 sections that define various crimes and prescribe the punishments for them. Section 471 of the IPC deals with the offense of using a forged document as genuine.
According to Section 471, if someone uses a forged document as genuine, intending that it should be believed to be genuine and with the intention that it be used as genuine, then he/she can be punished with imprisonment of up to three years, or with a fine, or with both.
The use of a forged document as genuine is a serious offense because it can cause harm to individuals or organizations. For instance, if a person uses a forged document to obtain a loan or to obtain employment, it can cause financial loss to the lender or the employer. Similarly, if a person uses a forged document to travel to a foreign country, it can cause harm to the country's security.
To prove the offense of using a forged document as genuine, the prosecution must establish that the accused had the intention to use the document as genuine and that he/she knew that the document was forged. It is also necessary to prove that the accused had the intention to deceive or mislead someone by using the forged document.
In conclusion, Section 471 of the IPC deals with the offense of using a forged document as genuine. It is a serious offense that can cause harm to individuals or organizations. To prove the offense, the prosecution must establish the intention of the accused to use the document as genuine, knowledge of the accused that the document was forged, and the intention to deceive or mislead someone by using the forged document.
Section 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B of IPC
This process will eventually culminate at the doors of the High Court, which is going to take months. The accused signed the postal acknowledgement in the name of the original payee. High Court relied on the decision of this Court in Vijay alias Gyan Chand Jain vs. We have carefully considered the rival contentions, judgment of the trial court, impugned judgment of the High Court and also material on record. Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both. If the case is still under investigation there is no present proceeding before the Court in which or as a consequence of which it might be necessary to compare the writings. The High Court pointed out that even though the executive magistrate before whom the specimen signatures were given did not have the authority to enquire into or try the case; however, PW-5 and PW-7 gave specimen signatures voluntarily during the course of investigation and differentiated the cases relied on by the trial court.
Legal Notice format u/s 406, 420, 468, 471, IPC and u/s 138, 142, NI Act.
An act committed under this para is considered as non-cognizable and non-bailable offences. . The punishment for it is the same as the punishment for forgery which is imprisonment of either description for 2 years or fine or both. To corroborate the version of the witnesses that they did not sign on loan documents and receipts and to prove that the signatures on the documents are that of the appellant-Sukh Ram and to prove the guilt of the accused that he forged the documents to misappropriate the government money, prosecution has examined PW-20 Mohinder Singh handwriting expert who opined that the disputed signatures of the witnesses PW-5 Nathu Ram and PW-7 Kirpu in the loan applications were not that of the said witnesses. Has practiced deception to obtain a certain document or has obtained a document from a person who is not in control of his senses. Understanding Section 471 IPC Section 471 of the IPC, 1860 deals with the concept of using a forged document or an electronic record as a genuine one. In Criminal Appeal Nos.
Further, Section 73 of the Evidence Act makes no distinction between a Civil Court and a Criminal Court. You have received illegal gain from my client by issuing a forged and fabricated insurance policies no- …. Savitri Devi- PW-8 deposed that she did not sign on any of the documents as she is illiterate and Smt. PW-5 Nathu Ram has categorically stated that he did not apply for any loan from the UCO Bank Darlalghat and that application for loan Exs. The person who has committed such a forgery is entitled to imprisonment extending up to 3 years and is also liable to pay a fine. Such offence is cognizable, bailable, non-compoundable and triable by a first class Judicial Magistrate. The offense under section 474 is bailable, non-compoundable, and cognizable similar to section 471.
Thus, if the individual who is accused of forgery had no intention to commit the said offence then they cannot be held guilty. Section 465 deals with the punishment for forgery which is imprisonment of either description which may extend to 2 years, fine, or both. OFFENCE PUNISHMENT COGNIZANCE BAIL TRIABLE BY Forgery of valuable security, will or authority to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive any money, etc. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed. If an individual is in possession of a forged Will wherein they have manipulated certain proceeds of the Will to their benefit, then in such a situation, the law will assume that the Will was forged with a malafide intention to gain wrongful benefit. As you had knowingly issued the cheque to my client.
A person must make, alter or use a fake document. Aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, State of Himachal Pradesh preferred appeal before the High Court assailing the correctness of the decision of the trial court. In the meanwhile if you do not have the protection of bail then the court will send you to jail. However, in the case of a non-cognizable offence, the police essentially require the approval of the court or the commission of a warrant before making an arrest. What is 313 CRPC examination? High Court pointed out that in the matter at hand, admittedly, the authority-Executive Magistrate before whom the specimen signatures were given did not have the authority to enquire into or try the case. If he has made or executed a document claiming to be someone else.
. Appellant Versus STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH. Pradyumna Singh vs Chancellor, Din Dayal Upadhyay,. During enquiry, it further came to light that disbursement of loans was not actually made to the beneficiaries. So it should be noted that a charge of forgery always comes down to one factor — intention.
Brother arrested under section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC
The provision of anticipatory bail can be found in the Cognizance of Section 467 IPC When it comes to IPC, the offences are further classified into two kinds, i. Appellant-Sukh Ram was a Gram Sewak, Navgaon under Arki Sub-Division during said period, 1983 to 1986. Illustration Let us understand the concept of Section 467 of IPC through an example. It is an act to commit fraud that is fueled by the intention of deceit. The marksheet in question was purported to have been drawn up by the father after revaluation, however, it indicated the same date of seal as that of the original marksheet. Your approach is impracticable. The Apex Court further held that only when the components of Section 463 are satisfied an individual can be held liable for forgery.
What is the Article 470? After that, the loan papers were presented to BDO—Balbir Singh and BDO used to sanction loan and subsidy and then send a letter of sanction to the Bank Manager-Arun Kumar Sood, who after opening the account of loanees and after following the requisite formalities, used to disburse the loan and subsidy to the beneficiaries. The case is at the final stage. Further, Section 467 of the IPC talks about the forgery of valuable security, wills, any document that enables an individual to adopt a son, or to transfer any valuable security, or to receive or deliver money or any property whether movable or immovable, or valuable security, or any such legal instrument which appears to be receipt of money acknowledging the payment, or any receipt acknowledging the delivery of movable property or valuable security. The statement of the above witnesses would clearly show that the documents were forged to avail the loan and the loan amount and subsidy amount were misappropriated. The account holder cheated a person who filed suit in the name of foreign job. Ibrahim and Ors v.
