SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Pat) 566

PATNA HIGH COURT
P.K.Sarin, J.
Ram Janam Singh
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4130 of 1996 ;
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 3, 1996

Execution of a sale deed by a person who has no title to the land does not constitute forgery under Section 464 of the IPC unless the person executes the document purporting to be executed by another person or alters a document in a material part or causes a person to sign, seal, execute, or alter a document knowing that the person does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration due to unsoundness of mind, intoxication, or deception.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 482 - QUASHING OF FIR - FORGERY - SALE DEED - EXECUTION BY PERSON WITHOUT TITLE - NOT FORGERY - SECTIONS 463, 464, 467, 468, 474 AND 120-B OF IPC - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.

Fact of the Case:

A complaint was filed against the petitioners for executing two sale deeds for land over which they had no title, allegedly with the intent to create a claim over the land and affect the complainant's title and possession. The Magistrate took cognizance of the complaint and summoned the petitioners for trial for offenses under Sections 467, 468, 474, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the execution of the sale deeds by the petitioners did not constitute forgery under Section 464 of the IPC because they did not execute the documents purporting to be executed by the complainant or his brothers or under their authority, and they did not alter any document in any material part. Therefore, the Magistrate erred in taking cognizance of the offenses under Sections 467, 468, 474, and 120-B of the IPC.

Issues: Whether the execution of a sale deed by a person who has no title to the land constitutes forgery under Section 464 of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Section 464 of the IPC and held that a person makes a false document only if they dishonestly or fraudulently make, sign, seal, or execute a document purporting to be made, signed, sealed, or executed by or by the authority of a person whom or by whose authority they know it was not made, signed, sealed, or executed, or if they alter a document in any material part after it has been made or executed, or if they cause a person to sign, seal, execute, or alter a document knowing that the person does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration due to unsoundness of mind, intoxication, or deception. The Court found that the petitioners' execution of the sale deeds did not fall within any of these clauses.

Final Decision: The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the Magistrate's order taking cognizance of the offenses under Sections 467, 468, 474, and 120-B of the IPC.

Judgment

P. K. Sarin, J.

1. Today learned counsel for opposite party No.2 has appeared. He had not appeared yesterday. On his request he was granted opportunity to address the Court on behalf of opposite party No.2 in this case. He has also been heard.

2. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 23-3-1995 passed by Judicial magistrate, Aurangabad, in Complaint case No.240 of 1994 by which the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 474 and 120-B of the Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to as the code) and ordered for issuance of summons against the petitioners.

3. It appears that a complaint was filed by opposite party No.2 against the petitioners. Copy of the complaint is at annexure-1. In the complaint it has been alleged that the complainant along with his three brothers own and possess an area of 17-37 decimals of land of khata No.342 appertaining to a number of plots including the plots mentioned in Schedule-I of the complaint but the accused Nos.1 to 3 have executed two sale deeds for an area of 4.20 acres and 4.35 acres of land in favour of accused No.4 to 10 (petitioners No.4 to 10) without any authority, h was alleged that this Act of the accused persons was intentional in order to make out the claim over the lands of the petitioners, and, thus, by creating forged and false documents for the purpose of cheating may affect the title and possession of the complaint in future. It was further alleged that the sale-deeds contained false statement of fact and Smt. Dukhni devi has been mentioned as one of the vendors although she has not signed the documents.

4. The learned Magistrate, alter considering the statement of the complainant and three witnesses examined on his behalf, found a prima-facie case to be made out against the petitioners for the offences as already mentioned above and, accordingly, summoned the petitioners for trial by the impugned order. Feeling aggrieved, this application has been filed by the accused of the case.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has contended that no offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 474 and 120-B of the Code is made out even if the entire complaint allegations are taken to be correct on its face value. It has been contended that the petitioners Nos.4 to 10 are only vendees and they had not created any document and no offence can be said to have been committed by them. It is further contended that the petitioners No.1 to 3 also cannot be said to have committed any offence of forgery or preparation of any forged document as they had executed the document in their own name and have not executed it purporting to be in the name of other person.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 has contended that the petitioners have committed the offence of forgery by creating a false document in respect of land over which the vendors (petitioners nos.1 to 3) had no title in them and this has been done in order to lay claim over the property in question.

7. Section 463 of the Code defines forgery. According to it, whoever makes any false document or part of a document, with intent to cause damage to the public or to any person, or to support any claim of title, or to came any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery, Sec.464 of the Code lays down as to what is meant by "making a false document" (as used in Sec.463)which reads as follows:

"464. Making a false document - A person is said to make a false document -Hrst - who dishonestly or fraudulently makes, signs-seals or execution a document or part of a document, or makes any mark denoting the execution of a document, with the intent of causing it to be believed that such document or part of a document was made, signed, sealed or executed by o






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top