Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Fabrication of Document in Civil Suit and Sec 195 CrPC - When a document is forged and produced in court during proceedings, the bar under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC applies only if the forgery occurs after the document's production or admission in evidence. If forgery occurs prior to filing or during the process of filing, Section 195 does not bar cognizance. The Supreme Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah vs. Meenakshi Marwah (AIR 2005 SC 2119) clarified that forgery committed before filing is outside the scope of Section 195 Sources: 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 707, ["2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 12483"].
Scope and Limitations of Sec 195 CrPC - Sec 195 CrPC restricts courts from taking cognizance of certain offences (e.g., forgery, false evidence) related to documents when such offences are committed in respect of documents that are in judicial custody or produced in court, but only if the forgery occurs after the document is in custody. Forgery prior to filing is not covered, allowing private parties to initiate proceedings for such offences Sources: 2022 0 Supreme(Telangana) 809, ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 59140"].
Cognizance and Offences under Sec 195 - The law bars police and courts from taking cognizance of offences under Sections 193, 463, 467, 471 IPC related to documents when committed after the document has been filed or produced in court, but not when such acts occur beforehand. For offences like forgery committed prior to filing, private complaints can be entertained, but police action is barred under Sec 195 Sources: 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 707, ["2025 6 Supreme 658"].
Forgery Before Filing and Legal Proceedings - If forgery is committed before the document is filed or produced in court, Sec 195 does not apply, and the accused can be prosecuted independently. The restriction under Sec 195 is only applicable when offences are committed concerning documents already in judicial custody or in evidence Sources: 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 12483.
Procedural Aspects and Court Jurisdiction - Courts may consider initiating proceedings under Section 340 CrPC or Sec 195(1)(b) if there is evidence of forgery or false evidence related to documents in court proceedings. However, the exercise of jurisdiction depends on whether the forgery occurred before or after the document's filing, with prior forgery outside Sec 195's scope Sources: 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 32655, ["2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 906"].
The fabrication or forgery of a document in a civil suit does not automatically invoke Sec 195 CrPC unless the forgery occurs after the document has been filed or produced in evidence in court. If the forgery is committed prior to filing, the bar under Sec 195 is not applicable, and private parties or the prosecution can initiate action without restriction. The law emphasizes the timing of the forgery relative to the court proceedings, with Section 195 primarily intended to prevent frivolous or vexatious proceedings concerning documents already in judicial custody. Therefore, fabrication before filing does not invoke Sec 195, but forgery after filing does, restricting cognizance and investigation accordingly.
In civil litigation, allegations of document or often arise, raising questions about criminal prosecution. A common query among litigants is: When Sec 340 of Crpc can be Invoked in Civil Suits? , empowers courts to initiate inquiries into offences affecting the administration of justice, such as under , but only under specific conditions tied to . This post explores the legal framework, judicial precedents, and practical implications, helping you understand when such invocation is permissible.
Section 340 CrPC allows a court to hold a and file a complaint for offences listed in , including of documents produced in court proceedings. However, imposes a bar on of these offences without a court's complaint, but only if the offence is committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding—known as (in the custody of the law).2008 0 Supreme(Mad) 4489
The main legal finding is clear: of a document in a civil suit invokes (and thus Section 340) only if the occurs during the time the document is in the court's custody, i.e., after production or tendering in evidence. prior to production generally escapes this bar.1996 0 Supreme(Raj) 181
This principle prevents frivolous prosecutions while safeguarding judicial integrity.
The has consistently delineated these boundaries. In a landmark constitutional bench decision, it was held that prior to the document's production or giving in evidence does not invoke Section 195, allowing independent prosecution.1996 0 Supreme(Raj) 181
Other precedents reinforce this:- Kailash Mangal v. Ramesh Chand: Uniformly holds pre-production outside Section 195.1996 0 Supreme(Raj) 181- Narendra Kumar Srivastava and Bandekar Brothers: Timing is crucial—pre-filing does not invoke the bar.1994 0 Supreme(All) 936 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 1024
In civil suits, when a party alleges :- Pre-filing : E.g., a forged sale deed created before suit filing. Section 195 does not apply; FIRs or private complaints under , 467 etc., can proceed directly. Investigation is not barred.1999 0 Supreme(P&H) 55- Post-production tampering: If a document is altered after tendering in evidence, the court may invoke Section 340 after , deeming it expedient in justice's interest.2008 0 Supreme(Mad) 4489 1996 0 Supreme(Raj) 181
A revision petition highlighted this: The court refused Section 340 action where predated court custody, directing that the Court may hold a preliminary enquiry... if under Section 340.2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 296
In another case under proceedings, it was ruled: It is a plain and simple case of of document and... would not be covered under (ii), allowing without court complaint.2010 0 Supreme(Guj) 266
Section 340 requires:1. into alleged offence.2. Finding that inquiry is .3. Court complaint to .
Courts dismiss premature applications, as in a suit for injunction where Section 340 was sought mid-cross-examination: No case made out at interim stage; liberty at final stage. Time exclusion under applies.2019 0 Supreme(Del) 2433
(ii) is analogous to 195(1)(b)(i) for false evidence, applying post-production. Pre-trial allows direct .2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 951
Note: This is general information based on judicial trends. Outcomes depend on facts; seek professional legal advice.
Final Conclusion: in civil suits prior to production does not invoke Section 340/195 CrPC. The bar safeguards judicial proceedings, not pre-suit acts. Stay informed, act timely, and protect your case.
References:1. in 1996 0 Supreme(Raj) 181: (ii) applies only when the is committed... after it has been produced or given in evidence.2. 2008 0 Supreme(Mad) 4489: principle.3. Additional cases: 1999 0 Supreme(P&H) 55, 2020 4 Supreme 582, 2010 0 Supreme(Guj) 266, 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 296.
#Section340CrPC #CivilSuitsLaw #DocumentForgery
State of Bihar came to the conclusion that if the fabrication of false evidence takes place or the document is tampered with before filing in the court, the provisions of Section 195 CrPC would not be attracted. ... Once process is issued under Sec. 204 Cr.P.C. in a private complaint, Sec. 244 Cr.P.C. onwards is applicable because it is a case institut....
Sec. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is a bar for taking cognizance of offence under Sec. 193 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code. Sec. 195 (b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows: "195. ... Though the bar under Sec. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is there for the offenc....
the transactions connecting to the listed offences under sec. 195 Cr.P.C. ... State of Bihar reported in (1998) 2 SCC 493 that one of the essential ingredients to invoke an action for the offences under Section 195 (1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. is those offences which ought to have been committed at a time when the document was in the custody of the ... 195 (4) ....
Lodged against the respondents alleging commission of offences under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 I.P.C. by them in course of the proceeding of a civil suit, on the ground that Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. prohibited entertainment of and investigation into the same by the police. ... Administrative Civil Judge, Shahdara to deal with the matter. Shri Neeraj Qaur, Ld. Administrative Civil#HL_EN....
This revision is directed against the concurring finding of the learned Civil Judge(Jr.Divn.), Purushottampur and learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chatrapur, Ganjam refusing to act in terms of Sec. 340 of the CrPC. 2. ... However, the Court may hold a preliminary enquiry and record a finding to the effect that it is expedient in the interest of justice that enquiry should be made into any of the offences referred to in Sec. #....
As per Sec.195 Cr.P.C., a private complaint for an offence under Sec.211 IPC is not maintainable. Sec.195 Cr.P.C. Reads: “195. ... , and it is not given to any private individual to invoke Sec.200 Cr.P.C. for initiating an action on an accusation of committing an offence under Sec.....
. - Sec. 195(1)(b)(i), 344 - The court discussed the provisions of IPC and Cr.P.C. in relation to giving false evidence, the requirement ... Issues: Inconsistency in the trial court's directions, requirement of lodging a complaint under Sec. 195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.P.C ... The magistrate was directed to either try the matter summarily under Sec. 344 of Cr.P.C. or follow the procedure under Sec. 195#....
PRAYING TO EXERCISING THE APPELLANT JURISDICTION, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, IN PCR (FR) NO.2/2018, DATED 18.10.2019, FILED U/S.340(2) R/W SEC. 195(1)(V) AND 4 OF CR.P.C, AND SET ASIDE IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC. ... With reasons petitioner prayed for following reliefs: a) By exercising the appellant jurisdiction, the order passed by the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judg....
Hence this court cannot take cognizance of offence punishable u/s 183 or 188 of IPC as a minor offence of sec. 353 of IPC in view of bar u/s 195 of Cr.P.C. 13. ... Unlike sec. 353 of IPC sec. 185 as well as 188 are non-cognizable offences. Sec. 195 of Cr.PC barred the taking of cognizance of offences punishable u/s 172 to 188 of IPC without the written complaint of the ....
It is settled law that if the forgery is committed with respect to a document prior to filing of the same in the Court proceedings, the bar of Sec. 195 Cr.P.C. is not applicable. It is held by Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah vs. Meenakshi Marwah, AIR 2005 SC 2119. ... On 11.02.2011, Colgate had applied for a copy of the certificate for use in legal proceedings as the same has to be filed in the civil#....
In the instant case, the learned Magistrate did not lodge any complaint. Admittedly, the offence under Sec. 193 of IPC is a warrant trial, which is punishable with imprisonment up to seven years and fine. Further, the provisions of Sec. 195 of Cr.P.C. states that, when there is allegation of fabrication, the Court must lodge a complaint. He straight away issued a show cause notice and Sec. 195 of Cr.P.C. mandates the lodging of the complaint, which is not followed in this cas....
30. Section 195 (1) (b) (ii) Cr.P.C. is analogous to Section 195 (1) (b) (i) Cr.P.C. Under Section 195 (1) (b) (ii) the offences for which cognizance can be taken is detailed, which revolves around forgery; u/s 195 (1) (b) (i) the offences under the penal code for which cognizance can be taken revolves around false evidence and fabrication of document. In such a case, documents fabricated being before trial, and the Court having taken cognizance of the offence and has proceed....
The question for consideration was, whether Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Cr.P.C. would apply where forgery of a document was committed before the said document was produced in the Court. The senior counsel for the defendant/applicant however drew attention to paragraph 24 thereof to contend that therein it has been laid down that the complaint is to be filed immediately as delay in prosecution of a guilty person comes to his advantage as witnesses become reluctant to give evi....
According to Proviso of section 195 (1) (b) (i) (as it stood then) except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate; (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), namely Sections 193 to 196, 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such an offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, o....
It cannot be stated that the allegations even according to the complainant are that fabrication was done in respect of documents produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court. It is a plain and simple case of fabrication of document and in my opinion would not be covered under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Cr.P.C. The embargo of Court not being able to take cognizance otherwise on the complaint in writing as contained in Section 195(1) therefore would not apply. T....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
