In the absence of concrete evidence proving intent or action constituting forgery, charges under Sections 468 and 471 IPC cannot stand.

ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.487/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Vaikom. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 IPC . The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner by using stickers, forged the number plate of his tourist bus by incorporating the registration number of another tourist bus belonging to him. According to the prosecution, this was done for the purpose of evading tax. These two tourist buses were taken into custody from a garage on 18.01.2017 at 7.15 p.m. Hence it is alleged that the petitioner committed the offences under and 471 .

-

2. According to the petitioner, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted that he is the owner of the new tourist bus which is involved in the case and is also the owner of two other tourist buses. The new vehicle was registered temporarily with the Joint Road Transport officer, Uzhavoor on 26.11.2016 as KL-05-AH-TEMP-7487. Annexure A1 is produced to prove the temporary registration of the vehicle. The temporary registration was renewed up to 24.01.2017 is the submission. Thereafter the vehicle was produced before the registering authority for registration on 24.01.2017. The registering authority, by order dated 24.01.2017, rejected the renewal application for temporary registration as per Annexure A2 is the further submission. It was rejected for the reason that the EURO-4 certificate from the manufacturer was not produced. According to the petitioner, the vehicle was kept in the garage of the petitioner because of that reason. Subsequently, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.2603/2017, for a direction to register the vehicle and based on the interim order of this Court, the above said vehicle was registered as KL-67/A-5085. It is submitted that, on 18.01.2017 at 7.15 p.m., the vehicles of the petitioner, when parked in the garage, were taken into custody by the police. According to the petitioner, the stickers were seen pasted in the space allotted for the number plate. It is further submitted that the vehicle was not seen plying, by the police. It is also submitted that the petitioner is residing about one kilometer away from the parking space of the vehicles. There is absolutely no evidence to show that the petitioner forged the number plate. Hence it is submitted that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of the process of court.

--

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Annexure A4 is the final report in this case. It will be better to extract the allegation against the petitioner in Annexure A4 final report:

5. The fist offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 468 IPC . says about forgery for purpose of cheating. Forgery is defined in Section 463 . is extracted hereunder:

“463. Forgery.—Whoever makes any false documents or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record, with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause 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.”

-

6. Section 468 IPC is also extracted hereunder:

“468. Forgery for purpose of cheating.—Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either descr