AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 156

Clause 184

12.82. The Law Commission in its 42nd Report recommended that: (i) the word "place" be also added in the first paragraph of section 464, and that (ii) the words "addition" and "obliteration" be also added in the second paragraph thereof in addition to the existing word "cancellation", and that (iii) sections 463 and 464 be combined and the illustrations provided thereunder be omitted. Clause 184 of the Bill seeks to bring about the aforesaid recommendations (i) and (i) except (iii). While we agree with the aforesaid changes proposed in clause 184 of the Bill, we propose to further examine the scope of section 464 I.P.C.

While section 463 defines "forgery", section 464 defines "making a false document" and enumerates various circumstances which would amount to making of a false document. It is not clearly spelt out under either of the sections 463 or 464 as to whether forgery of a copy of a document or copying a false document or making a false copy of a document, would also amount to forgery within the meaning of section 464, I.P.C..

It would not be out of place to mention that under sections 2 and 4 of the Forgery & Counterfeiting Act, 1981 (U.K.) copying a false document and using a copy of a false document, has been specifically made punishable. As regards the position in India, there existed a controversy on the above point [see H.S. Shamosundorariah v. State of Mysore, (1968) 1 Mys LJ 294 (297); Gobinda Prasad Parul v. State, AIR 1962 Cal 174 (175), (cited at p. 3939 of Penal Law of India by Dr. Hari Singh Gaur, 10th Edn. and 5 Born HC Rep, cc. 56 ref. Law of Crimes (A Handbook) by V.V. Raghavan, 2nd Edn., p. 931)1.

However, the Supreme Court has finally settled the Position in Rama Shankar Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1970 UJ (SC) 507 by approving the following observations in Essan Chunder Dutt v. Baboo Prannauth Chowdry, 1 Marshalla's Reports 270.

"We regard the forgery of a copy clearly to come within the purview of the section just cited. Forgery of a copy which was not true copy, would be the offence there rendered penal, and the criminal intention to make a false document serves the purpose of a true one would be clear by such act of forgery."

We are of the view that though the position is now settled it would be desirable to add an Explanation in section 464, I.P.C. so as to make it specifically clear that knowingly committing forgery of a copy of a document or knowingly making copy of a false document or making a false copy of a document would also amount to forgery within the meaning of section 464, I.P.C..

We recommend that in order to meet the above situation, Explanation 3 in section 464 may be added on the following lines:-

"Explanation 3.-Knowingly committing forgery of a copy of a document or knowingly making a false copy of a document or copying a false document which he knows or believes to be a false document, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as a copy of a genuine document to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person's prejudice, will amount to making a false document."



The Indian Penal Code Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys