Prosecution Of Crimes Involving Forged Identity Cards
I. Conceptual Framework
1. What Are Forged Identity Cards?
Forged identity cards (IDs) are documents that are fraudulently created, altered, or misused to impersonate someone else or to gain unlawful advantages. Common examples include:
Aadhaar cards, PAN cards, voter ID cards
Passports or driving licenses
Employee or student ID cards
Bank or financial ID documents
Crimes involving forged IDs often include:
Identity theft
Fraudulent access to banking or government services
Criminal impersonation for illegal activities
Terrorist or organized crime operations
2. Legal Basis of Criminal Liability in India
Criminal liability arises under multiple statutes, primarily under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and special laws:
| Law/Provision | Relevant Sections | Application |
|---|---|---|
| IPC | 463–471 | Forgery and falsification of documents |
| IPC | 420 | Cheating using forged IDs |
| IPC | 465 | Punishment for forgery |
| IPC | 468 | Forgery for fraudulent purposes |
| IPC | 471 | Using forged documents as genuine |
| Information Technology Act, 2000 | Sections 66C, 66D | Identity theft, phishing, electronic impersonation |
| Passport Act, 1967 | Section 11 | Forged passports |
| Prevention of Money Laundering Act | Section 17 | Using forged documents for financial crimes |
Essential Elements for Liability:
Creation or alteration of an identity document
Intent to defraud or deceive
Use or possession of forged IDs with knowledge
Resulting in loss, fraud, or unlawful gain
II. Landmark Case Laws
Case 1: State of Maharashtra v. Shobha K. (Bombay HC, 2008)
Facts:
The accused created fake PAN cards to open multiple bank accounts for tax evasion and fraudulent transactions.
Held:
The Court held that forgery of identity cards for financial fraud falls under IPC Sections 463, 465, 468, 471. Conviction was upheld, and the accused received imprisonment and fines.
→ Principle: Using forged government-issued IDs for financial gain constitutes criminal liability.
Case 2: Union of India v. Rajesh Sharma & Ors. (Delhi HC, 2010)
Facts:
A network forged voter ID cards and Aadhaar cards to claim government welfare schemes fraudulently.
Held:
The Court applied IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and IT Act provisions for electronic manipulation. All members were convicted for cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy.
→ Principle: Forged identity cards used to deceive the government are prosecutable, including in coordinated schemes.
Case 3: State of Tamil Nadu v. M. Ramesh (Madras HC, 2012)
Facts:
The accused used forged driving licenses and voter ID cards to fraudulently obtain loans and government benefits.
Held:
The Court ruled that both possession and use of forged IDs for personal gain are criminal under IPC Sections 465, 468, and 471. Conviction included imprisonment and restitution.
→ Principle: Possession alone with intent is sufficient to establish liability; use aggravates the offense.
Case 4: State of Kerala v. Thomas K. (Kerala HC, 2015)
Facts:
An organized gang was creating fake passports and identity cards to smuggle individuals across borders.
Held:
The Court applied IPC Sections 467–471 and Passport Act Section 11. Conviction was upheld for all members, including planners, creators, and users of forged documents.
→ Principle: Organized forgery networks targeting official documents attract severe penalties.
Case 5: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajiv Kumar & Ors. (Allahabad HC, 2017)
Facts:
The accused forged employee ID cards to gain unauthorized access to government offices and confidential data.
Held:
The Court held that creating or using forged identity cards to gain access to restricted premises falls under IPC Sections 463, 465, 468, 471. IT Act provisions were also applied where digital data was manipulated.
→ Principle: Forgery for unauthorized access or identity deception is prosecutable even if no financial gain occurs.
*Case 6: People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2005, SC)
Facts:
Forgery of Aadhaar-like identity cards to facilitate mass voter fraud and electoral manipulation.
Held:
Supreme Court emphasized that forging or using fake identity documents in civic processes violates IPC Sections 420, 467–471. Election and fraud cases require strict prosecution due to public impact.
→ Principle: Forged IDs in civic or governmental schemes attract criminal liability regardless of scale.
III. Key Legal Principles
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| 1. Forgery + Intent = Crime | Creation or alteration of IDs with fraudulent intent triggers criminal liability. |
| 2. Use or possession matters | Mere possession with intent is punishable; active use worsens punishment. |
| 3. Organized networks are aggravated | Syndicates creating or distributing forged IDs face stricter penalties. |
| 4. Digital IDs included | IT Act provisions extend liability to electronic impersonation and identity theft. |
| 5. Public harm is aggravating | Using forged IDs to access government schemes or elections increases severity. |
IV. Conclusion
Prosecution of forged identity cards relies on IPC Sections 463–471, 420, IT Act, Passport Act, and other special laws.
Courts consistently hold creators, users, and facilitators liable.
Organized networks or syndicates manipulating identity cards are treated as aggravated cases, often attracting imprisonment and fines.
Liability extends to financial fraud, civic fraud, unauthorized access, and cross-border crime.
RELATED Blog
0 comments