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

1998 Supreme(SC) 146

K.T.THOMAS, M.M.PUNCHHI, M.SRINIVASAN
Sachida Nand Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

Thomas, J.-Can prosecution be maintained in respect of a forged document produced in court unless complaint has been filed by the court concerned in that behalf? In other words, the question involved in this appeal is, whether the prohibition contained in Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Code’) would apply to such prosecution. The aforesaid question, tick­lish it may appear to some extent, seemed to have received a quietus from this Court with the pronouncement in Patel Laljibhai Somabha v. The State of Gujarat1, while considering the scope of its corresponding provision in the old Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. But a subsequent decision of this Court in Gopalakrishna Menon & Anr. v. D. Raja Reddy & Anr.2, which struck a different note thereon seemed to have revived the issue and kept in buoying up in the legal stream. That question, in this appeal, has arisen from the following facts :

2. A complaint was filed by second respondent (Lal Narain Singh) in the court of a Chief Judicial Magistrate, alleging offences, inter alia, under Sections 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code on the facts that appellants had forged a docume



































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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top