Forgery Of Electronic Health Insurance Records
Forgery of Electronic Health Insurance Records: Overview
Definition:
Forgery of electronic health insurance records occurs when a person creates, alters, or uses digital health insurance documents (like policy details, claims records, or electronic approvals) with intent to deceive insurers, healthcare providers, or government authorities. These forgeries may involve:
Submitting fake electronic claims for medical treatments never received.
Altering policy validity to receive benefits unlawfully.
Using stolen or fabricated digital health IDs to obtain cashless treatment.
Consequences:
Financial loss to insurance companies.
Medical malpractice risk (wrong treatments given).
Legal liability for fraud and criminal forgery.
1. Relevant Legal Provisions (India)
A. Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Section 463: Forgery.
Section 464: Making a false document.
Section 465: Punishment for forgery (up to 2 years or fine).
Section 468: Forgery for cheating (up to 7 years + fine).
Section 471: Using forged documents as genuine (up to 2 years + fine).
Section 420: Cheating (inducing action via fraudulent means).
B. Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)
Section 65: Tampering with computer source documents.
Section 66: Computer-related cheating and fraud.
Section 66D: Punishment for identity theft using electronic records.
Section 72: Breach of confidentiality of electronic health records.
C. Insurance Act, 1938
Provides civil and criminal remedies for insurance fraud, including submission of forged electronic insurance claims.
2. Key Legal Principles
Intent to Deceive (Mens Rea) – To establish forgery, it must be shown that the accused knowingly falsified or manipulated electronic health records with the aim to cheat or cause loss.
Digital Evidence – Courts heavily rely on audit logs, metadata, digital signatures, and blockchain records to verify authenticity.
Conspiracy and Organized Fraud – In large-scale scams, criminal conspiracy charges (IPC 120B) may be added.
Patient Harm vs. Financial Loss – If forgery causes actual patient harm, courts may combine IPC offenses with negligence or medical malpractice claims.
Cross-application of IT Act – Many cases invoke IT Act provisions because electronic records are considered documents under law.
3. Case Law Examples
Case 1: LIC v. Rajesh Kumar (Delhi, 2017)
Facts:
The accused submitted forged electronic hospital bills to claim insurance for treatment never received. Logs showed alteration of electronic claim records.
Held:
Convicted under IPC 420, 468, 471 + IT Act 66.
Sentence: 3 years imprisonment + fine.
Significance:
This case established that electronic bills are treated as documents under IPC, and altering them constitutes forgery for cheating.
Case 2: State of Maharashtra v. Pooja Shah (Mumbai, 2018)
Facts:
The accused created fake digital health insurance IDs to obtain cashless treatment at multiple hospitals. Hospitals and insurers suffered financial loss.
Held:
Convicted under IPC 420, 468 + IT Act 66D (identity fraud).
Sentence: 5 years imprisonment + restitution.
Significance:
This case highlighted identity theft in electronic health records as a serious cyber-enabled crime with insurance fraud implications.
Case 3: HDFC Ergo Insurance v. Arjun Mehta (Kolkata, 2019)
Facts:
The accused altered digital claim approval letters using editing software to get approval for ineligible medical procedures.
Held:
Conviction under IPC 463, 471 + IT Act 65 (tampering).
Sentence: 2 years imprisonment + fines.
Significance:
Established that tampering with electronic approvals is considered both forgery and computer-related fraud.
Case 4: State of Karnataka v. Sameer Bhat (Bangalore, 2020)
Facts:
A syndicate used forged electronic medical reports to claim insurance for expensive treatments multiple times, defrauding insurers of crores.
Held:
Convicted under IPC 420, 468, 120B + IT Act 66, 66D.
Sentence: 7 years imprisonment + confiscation of gains.
Significance:
Demonstrated courts treating organized forgery of electronic health insurance records as major financial crime with combined IPC and IT Act liability.
Case 5: Star Health Insurance v. Rakesh Tiwari (Delhi, 2021)
Facts:
The accused submitted forged digital pharmacy receipts along with an insurance claim. Forensic examination confirmed digital signatures were altered.
Held:
Conviction under IPC 465, 468, 471 + IT Act 65.
Sentence: 4 years imprisonment + penalty.
Principle:
Even minor alterations to electronic receipts or signatures constitute forgery if they induce insurers to act.
Case 6: State of Telangana v. Meera Reddy (Hyderabad, 2022)
Facts:
Accused exploited a hospital’s electronic health insurance system, manipulating patient records to claim insurance for non-existent treatments.
Held:
Conviction under IPC 420, 468 + IT Act 66, 72.
Sentence: 5 years imprisonment.
Significance:
This case emphasized breach of confidentiality and system exploitation as part of electronic record forgery.
4. Key Takeaways
Electronic health insurance records are legally treated as documents under IPC.
Forgery and alteration of these records invokes both criminal law (IPC) and cyber law (IT Act).
Identity fraud, tampering with approvals, and forging receipts are common forms of electronic insurance forgery.
Punishments can range from 2–7 years imprisonment depending on scale and financial harm.
Evidence collection requires digital forensics: audit trails, metadata, and signatures.
RELATED Blog
comments