Forgery And Falsification Of Documents
Forgery and Falsification of Documents: Overview
Forgery:
Forgery is the fraudulent making or alteration of a document with the intent to deceive or cause damage.
It involves creating a false document or materially altering an existing document so that it appears genuine.
The purpose is usually to cause wrongful loss to one person or wrongful gain to another.
The forgery must be done knowingly and with intent to defraud.
Falsification:
Falsification refers to manipulating or tampering with documents or records (not necessarily creating a new document) to misrepresent the truth.
It can involve making false entries, altering records, or suppressing facts.
The aim is often to mislead authorities, persons, or institutions.
Falsification may or may not involve making a wholly new document but usually involves corrupting the contents of an existing document.
Legal Definitions and Statutory Provisions
In Indian law, both offenses are primarily covered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), especially Sections 463 to 477.
Section 463 IPC defines forgery.
Section 464 IPC punishes forgery.
Section 465 IPC provides punishment for forgery.
Falsification is covered under Sections 468, 471, 474 IPC, depending on context.
Essential Ingredients of Forgery
Making a false document or altering a genuine document.
The false document must be made with the intent to cause damage or injury to someone or to support some fraudulent purpose.
The document must be one which is capable of affecting legal relations.
Key Case Law on Forgery and Falsification
1. Shyam Lal v. State of Delhi, AIR 1953 SC 476
Issue: Whether a document signed by a person who had no authority to sign it constitutes forgery.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that unauthorized signing with intent to cause injury amounts to forgery.
Significance: Established that forgery involves both unauthorized making and fraudulent intent.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai, (2003) 4 SCC 601
Issue: Falsification of medical records to mislead the court.
Holding: The Court held that falsification includes making a false entry in a document with intent to cause injury or deception.
Significance: Expanded understanding of falsification beyond just physical documents to include records and entries.
3. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632
Issue: Whether fabrication or falsification for malicious prosecution amounts to offense under forgery provisions.
Holding: The court emphasized the need for mens rea (criminal intent) and fraudulent purpose.
Significance: Clarified the role of intent and injury in forgery and falsification.
4. R. Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1952 SC 196
Issue: Whether alterations to a document without fraudulent intent constitute forgery.
Holding: Held that alterations made without fraudulent intent or to deceive do not amount to forgery.
Significance: Intention to defraud is a crucial element in forgery.
5. State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, AIR 1999 SC 2379
Issue: Falsification of government records to show false age for government benefits.
Holding: Court held such falsification amounts to a serious offense under IPC, punishable with imprisonment.
Significance: Highlighted falsification as a serious crime affecting public administration.
Differences Between Forgery and Falsification
| Aspect | Forgery | Falsification |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Making a false document or altering genuine one with intent to defraud | Manipulating or tampering with documents or entries to misrepresent truth |
| Nature of Offense | Creating or altering document to appear genuine | Changing content or record in an existing document |
| Intent | Fraudulent intent to cause wrongful loss or gain | Intent to mislead or cause injury |
| Scope | Often broader, includes making whole documents | Often limited to changes in contents or entries |
| Punishment | Covered under Sections 463-465 IPC | Covered under Sections 468-471 IPC |
Conclusion
Forgery and falsification are both offenses aimed at protecting the authenticity and integrity of documents and records.
The key element in both offenses is fraudulent intent or mens rea.
Courts emphasize that unauthorized making or alteration of documents with an intent to deceive or cause wrongful loss is forgery.
Falsification involves corrupting existing documents or records to mislead, often with serious legal consequences.
Case law consistently stresses the requirement of intent and the potential to cause injury or deception for these offenses to be established.
RELATED Blog
0 comments