Counterfeit Stamps And Government Seals
✅ I. Introduction
Counterfeiting of stamps, currency, government seals, and instruments of authentication is considered a serious offence under Indian law. It is seen as a direct attack on the sovereignty and authority of the state.
These offences are covered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, particularly in Chapters XII and XVIII, dealing with:
Counterfeiting Government stamps
Counterfeiting or using Government seals
Forging or possessing counterfeit marks of authenticity
Such crimes are not merely private wrongs — they are treated as crimes against the state and public trust.
📜 II. Relevant Legal Provisions under the IPC
| Section | Offence | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| S. 255 IPC | Counterfeiting Government stamps | Life imprisonment or up to 10 years + fine |
| S. 256 IPC | Possession of instrument/material for making counterfeit stamps | Up to 7 years + fine |
| S. 257 IPC | Making or selling instruments for counterfeiting stamps | Up to 7 years + fine |
| S. 258 IPC | Sale of counterfeit stamps | Up to 7 years + fine |
| S. 259 IPC | Having possession of counterfeit stamps | Up to 7 years + fine |
| S. 261 IPC | Fraudulent use of genuine Government stamp | Up to 3 years + fine |
| S. 263-A IPC | Prohibition on fictitious stamps (introduced to curb fictitious postage) | Up to 1 year + fine |
| S. 467, 471 IPC | Using forged documents as genuine (read with stamps/seals) | Up to life imprisonment |
| S. 474 IPC | Possession of forged documents with intent to use | Up to life imprisonment |
🔍 III. Elements of the Offence
To prove offences under these sections, the prosecution must show:
Falsification or imitation of government stamp/seal.
Intention to deceive or defraud government or public.
Knowledge or reason to believe that the stamp/seal is counterfeit.
Possession, use, or sale of such counterfeit material.
🧑⚖️ IV. Important Case Laws
1. Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751
Facts:
The accused executed a sale deed using a forged revenue stamp and a fake seal of the registrar.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court observed that affixing a fake seal or stamp with fraudulent intent amounts to serious forgery and use of counterfeit government instruments. The Court upheld the charges under Sections 467 and 471 IPC.
Key Principle:
Using forged or counterfeit stamps and seals with the intent to pass off as genuine is a serious criminal offence, punishable with long imprisonment.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy, (1999) 7 SCC 685
Facts:
The accused was found with large quantities of counterfeit revenue stamps, allegedly used in official documents.
Judgment:
The Court held that mere possession of such counterfeit government stamps raises a presumption of intent to use them fraudulently, unless the accused can explain possession.
Key Principle:
Possession itself can be incriminating unless adequately explained.
3. Ganga Din v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1959 All 399
Facts:
The accused forged a will using a counterfeit notary stamp and government seal.
Judgment:
Allahabad High Court convicted the accused under Sections 467 and 259 IPC. The Court noted that such acts undermine public confidence in the authenticity of public documents.
Key Principle:
Forgery using counterfeit government seals is treated as aggravated forgery due to its potential to deceive courts and authorities.
4. State of Andhra Pradesh v. P. Venkateshwarlu, 2002 Cri LJ 1350 (AP HC)
Facts:
The accused was found running a racket involving fake non-judicial stamp papers.
Judgment:
The Court observed that large-scale printing and circulation of fake stamp papers is not just cheating but an attack on the financial structure of legal transactions.
Key Principle:
Crimes involving counterfeit stamp papers are economic offences with wide public impact and must be dealt with sternly.
5. Dinesh Dalmia v. CBI, (2007) 8 SCC 770
Facts:
In a larger financial fraud, the accused was found using forged documents with counterfeit seals to siphon funds.
Judgment:
Supreme Court emphasized that forging government seals and stamps amounts to tampering with the authenticity of state authority, and attracts the gravest punishment under Sections 467 and 474 IPC.
Key Principle:
Using forged stamps and seals for high-level frauds constitutes compound offences — both financial and against the state.
6. Fake Stamp Paper Scam (Telgi Case), State of Maharashtra v. Abdul Karim Telgi & Ors. (2000–2007)*
Facts:
Abdul Karim Telgi masterminded the biggest stamp paper scam in India, involving forged government stamp papers, sold to banks, courts, insurance firms, etc., across multiple states.
Judgment:
Multiple courts, including the CBI court, convicted Telgi under Sections 255–259 IPC and others. The court held that such systemic forgery undermines the entire legal and economic framework.
Key Principle:
Counterfeiting government stamp papers on a large scale is a national economic threat, and attracts maximum statutory punishment.
7. Madhukar D. Shende v. State of Maharashtra, 2002 Cri LJ 1194 (Bom HC)
Facts:
Accused was caught using fake court fee stamps in civil litigation.
Judgment:
Bombay High Court held that such offences damage the credibility of judicial processes and upheld the conviction under Sections 255 and 259 IPC.
Key Principle:
Counterfeit judicial stamps amount to interference with justice delivery, and are treated seriously.
⚖️ V. Punishment and Judicial Trends
| Section | Offence | Punishment | Judicial Approach |
|---|---|---|---|
| 255 IPC | Counterfeiting government stamp | Life or up to 10 years + fine | Treated as serious economic offence |
| 259 IPC | Possession of counterfeit stamp | Up to 7 years + fine | Presumption arises from possession |
| 467 IPC | Forgery of valuable security or authority | Life imprisonment | Courts apply it in cases involving seals |
| 471 IPC | Using forged document as genuine | Same as forgery | Applied in most fraud cases |
| 263-A IPC | Dealing with fictitious stamps | 1 year + fine | For fictitious postal stamps |
🧾 VI. Procedural Safeguards
Investigation must be handled by experienced officers (due to technical nature).
FSL reports (Forensic Science Lab) are vital to prove that stamps or seals are fake.
Search and seizure under CrPC require valid warrants.
Presumption of guilt may arise from unexplained possession of counterfeit instruments.
📌 VII. Conclusion
Counterfeiting of government stamps and seals is not just about forgery—it strikes at the credibility of governance and the justice system. The judiciary treats such offences with utmost seriousness, especially where:
The forgery is part of a larger financial scam.
Judicial or official documents are compromised.
Public trust or revenue is at stake.
The law provides strict penalties, including life imprisonment, to ensure that public confidence in government authentication mechanisms is preserved.
RELATED Blog
0 comments