The court clarified that the bar under Section 195 CrPC does not impede investigation when forged documents are produced following the committal of the alleged forgery.

K.BABU, J.

--------------------------------------

W.P (Crl) No.182 of 2026 ---------------------------------------

Dated this the 9^th day of March, 2026 JUDGMENT The prayers in this Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:

“i. To issue a writ of mandamus, direction or order directing the 1^st respondent to conduct proper investigation on Exhibit-P3 and Exhibit-P5 complaints.

ii. To issue such other relief as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of this case.

iii. Petitioner also prays that this Honourable Court may be pleased to dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language. ”

2. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 complaint before the Station House Officer, Central Police Station, Ernakulam alleging forgery against respondent No.3 and two others. It is alleged that respondent No.3 filed forged documents in a proceedings before the High Court in W.P(C) No.8820/2025.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Police has not registered any crime based on the complaint. So, the petitioner filed a complaint (Ext.P5) before the Commissioner of Police . 4. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the stand of the Investigating Officer is that as the forged document was produced before the court, investigation is barred under Section 195 of the Cr.PC. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor relying on Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah [(2005) 4 SCC 370] submitted that the bar under Section 195 Cr.PC is not applicable if the alleged document was produced before the court after commission of the act of forgery. In Iqbal Singh Marwah the Apex Court held thus:

“33. In view of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that Sachida Nand Singh [(1998) 2 SCC 493 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 660] has been correctly decided and the view taken therein is the correct view. Section 195 (1)(b)(ii) CrPC would be attracted only when the offences enumerated in the said provision have been committed with respect to a document after it has been produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court i.e. during the time when the document was in custodia legis.”

In view of the settled legal position, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.2 to consider Ext.P3 in accordance with law.

Sd/-