Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > Forgery and False Document (Ss. 463 to 465 IPC)
Forgery is a fraudulent act of creating a copy of a document, signature, a bank note or work of authorship that is intended to be passed off as genuine when it is not. Forgery in simple terms means fabricating and producing false documents or part of a document to cause harm to an individual. It also includes fraudulently making or altering writing or signature claiming/purporting to be made by another, and the false making or material alteration or addition to a written instrument like a cheque or a bond for the purpose of fraud and deceit leading to harming someone. Negotiable instruments, cheques, bonds, wills and contracts are some of the examples of documents which can be forged. The usual types of forgery are: simulation of writing by free hand, traced forgery, and disguised writing. Those who commit forgery are usually charged with the crime of fraud.
Chapter XVIII of IPC deals with offences related to document and property marks. Section (463 to 477-A) deals with cases of forgery of documents or electronic record. Section 463 deals with forgery whereas Section 465 is punishment for forgery. What constitutes a false document is elaborately given in Section 464. Whereas Ss. 466 to 469 are few aggravated offences of forgery. Section 470 defines a forged document.
Under Section 29 IPC, the word “document” denotes any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters, figures, or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, as evidence of that matter.
Defining Forgery:
It is to be noted that when defining forgery Section 463 must be read with Section 464 making false document because the definition of a false document [S.464] is a part of the definition of forgery and that the intent contemplated in Section 464 is an intent not different in its quality and aim from that prescribed by Section 463. These two sections are, therefore, closely related and hence the illustrations of forgery are found only under Section 464.
Section 463 IPC:
Forgery
Whoever makes any false documents or part of a document 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.
Ingredients of Forgery Under Section 463 IPC:
In the landmark case Sushil Suri v. C.B.I., AIR 2011 SC 1713 case, the Supreme Court laid down the basic elements of forgery in S.463 IPC as follows:
- Making a false document or part of it.
- Such act is done with intention:
- To cause damage or injury to the public or any person
- To support or claim any title
- To cause any person to part with property
- To cause any person to enter into an express or implied contract
- To committed fraud or that fraud is committed
The first ingredient in order to make someone liable for the offence of forgery is making of a false document or electronic record. Thus, it involves deception. What is false document is explained under Section 464 IPC.
Every false or fabricated document is not a forged document. There must be acts that constitute the document a false document a false or fabricated one, that is to say the case must fall within a definition of making a false document in Section 464 of IPC, and such false document must also possess the character or tendency described in Section 463.
The second ingredient is intention to deceive. The crime of forgery is not imposed unless it is done with the intent to commit fraud larceny. For example, the work of art can be replicated or copied without any crime being committed unless someone attempted to sell or represent it as the original copies. Five situations are given under this section and if the intention of offender in any one of the situations is met then one of the ingredients of forgery is fulfilled.
In T.N. Rugmini v. C. Achutta Menon, AIR 1991 SC 983 case, the Supreme Court held that making an application in another’s name without any intention to defraud or causing harm to anyone does not amount to an offence of forgery under section 464 of IPC.
Situation 1: To Cause Damage or Injury to the Public or any Person
Injury is something other than economic loss, that is, deprivation of property, whether immovable or movable, or of money, and it will include a harm whatever caused to any person in body, mind reputation or such others. It is non-economic or non-pecuniary loss.
It should be noted that the intention to cause injury is not an essential ingredient of the offence of forgery, rather Intention to cause damage or injury to the public or person is only one of the five situations. The situation arises when some damage or injury must be intended to be caused by the false document to the public or to any individual. Causing of actual damage, injury or fraud is not necessary.
In Sanjiv Ratanappa v. Emperor, AIR 1932 Bom. 545 case, the court held that a police officer who makes any changes in his diary so as to show that he had not kept certain persons under surveillance will not be held liable for the offence of forgery because there is no risk of damage or injury to any other individual. Therefore, if there is no damage or loss to any individual then the person will not be made liable under Section 463 of IPC.
Situation 2: To Support Any Claim or Title
A person who has legal claim or title over a property can be made liable under section 463 if he counterfeits the documents in order to support it. Illustrations (f), (g), (h) and (i) attached to Section 464 makes it clear. An actual intention to convert an illegal or doubtful claim into an apparently legal claim is dishonest and will constitute the offence forgery. The word “claim” is not intended to mean to a claim of property only, it includes claim to the custody of children or wife or claim to be admitted as a student to any course of study or to any examination. For Example: D said that his property will be transferred to A, B and C in equal share after his life time. A acting in dishonest manner scratched the name of B intending that whole property will be shared between himself and C. Here A has committed forgery and will be liable under section 463 of IPC.
Situation 3: To Cause Any Person to Part with His Property
When a person makes a false document with an intention to cause, any other person to part with his property and it is not necessary that the property must be in existence at that time when the false document is made. For example: If A gives an order to B to make some furniture for him, but C before the said furniture is made writes a false letter purporting, but falsely, to be signed by A, authorizing B to deliver the same to C when made. Here C will be guilty of an offence under this section by writing that false letter with intent to cause B to part with the said furniture, when made.
Situation 4: To Enter into Any Express or Implied Contract:
If the contract is made with the element of fraud, it becomes voidable and if a person under IPC, does the same thing, he will be held liable for committing the fraud.
Situation 5: To Commit Any Fraud or That Fraud May Be Committed
There are cases in which a person can be made liable if he makes a false document with an intention to commit fraud with the other individual. In order to constitute fraud, an intention to deceive is required and by means of “deceit” to obtain an advantage is necessary and if a document is fabricated with such an intention, the offence of forgery is committed.
In Dr. Vimla vs Delhi Administration, AIR 1963 SC 1572 case, the Supreme Court held that the expression “defraud” involves two elements, namely (i) deceit and (ii) injury to the person deceived.
Making False Document:
The person is said to make a false document is explained under Section 464. Section 464 explains what amounts to making of a false document or electronic record. The document must be legally capable of affecting the fraud intended and it is not necessary that the document should be published or made in the name of an existing person. This has been made clear by Explanation 2 to Section 464.
Section 464 IPC:
Making a false document
A person is said to make a false document-
First- Who dishonestly or fraudulently makes, signs, seals or executes a document or part of a document, or makes any mark denoting the execution of a document, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document or part of a document was made, signed, sealed or executed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed, or at a time at which he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed; or
Secondly- Who, without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or otherwise, alters a document in any material part thereof, after it has been made or executed either by himself or by any other person, whether such person be living or dead at the time of such alteration; or
Thirdly- Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document, knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or that by reason of deception practiced upon him, he does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration.
Illustrations:
(a) A has a letter of credit upon B for rupees 10,000 written by Z. A, in order to defraud B, adds a cipher to the 10,000, and makes the sum 1,00,000 intending that it may be delivered by B that Z so wrote the letter. A has committed forgery.
(b) A, without Z’s authority, affixes Z’s seal to a document purporting to be a conveyance of an estate from Z to A, with the intention to selling the estate to B, and thereby of obtaining from B the purchase-money. A has committed forgery.
I A picks up a cheque on a banker-signed by B, payable to bearer, but without any sum having. Been inserted in the cheque. A fraudulently fills up the cheque by inserting the sum of ten thousand rupees. A commits forgery.
(d) A leaves with B, his agent, a cheque on a banker, signed by A, without inserting the sum payable and authorizes B to fill up the cheque by inserting a sum not exceeding ten thousand rupees for the purpose of making certain payment. B fraudulently fills up the cheque by inserting the sum of twenty thousand rupees. B commits forgery.
I A draws a bill of exchange on himself in the name of B without B’s authority, intending to discount it as a genuine bill with a banker and intending to take up the bill on its maturity. Here, as A draws the bill with intent to deceive the banker by leading him to suppose that he had the security of B, and thereby to discount the bill, A is guilty of forgery.
(f) Z’s will contains the these words-“I direct that all my remaining property be equally divided between A, B and C” A dishonestly scratches out B’s name, intending that it may be believed that the whole was left to himself and C. A has committed forgery.
(g) A endorses a Government promissory note and makes it payable to Z or his order by writing on the bill the words “Pay to Z or his order” and signing the endorsement. B dishonestly erases the words “Pay to Z or his order”, and thereby converts the special endorsement into a blank endorsement. B commits forgery.
(h) A sells and conveys an estate to Z. A afterwards, in order to defraud Z of his estate, executes a conveyance of the same estate to B, dated six months earlier than the date of the conveyance to Z, intending it to be believed that he had conveyed the estate to B before he conveyed it to Z. A has committed forgery.
(i) Z dictates his will to A. A intentionally writes down a different legatee from the legatee named by Z, and by representing to Z that he has prepared the will according to his instructions, induces Z to sign the will. A has committed forgery.
(j) A writes a letter and signs it with B’s name without B’s authority, certifying that A is a man of good character and in distressed circumstances from unforeseen misfortune, intending by means of such letter to obtain alms from Z and other persons. Here, as A made a false document in order to induce Z to part with property. A has committed forgery.
(k) A without B’s authority writes a letter and signs it in B’s name certifying to A’s character, intending thereby to obtain employment under Z. A has committed forgery in as much as he intended to deceive Z by the forged certificate, and thereby to induce Z to enter into an express or implied contract for service.
Explanation 1- A man’s signature of his own name may amount to forgery.
Illustrations:
(a) A signs his own name to a bill of exchange, intending that it may be believed that the bill was drawn by another person of the same name. A has committed forgery.
(b) A writes the word “accepted” on a piece of paper and signs it with Z’s name, in order that B may afterwards write on the paper a bill of exchange drawn by B upon Z, and negotiate the bill as though it had been accepted by Z. A is guilty of forgery; and if B, knowing the fact, draws the bill upon the paper pursuant to A’s intention, B is also guilty of forgery.
(c) A picks up a bill of exchange payable to the order of a different person of the same name. A endorses the bill in his own name, intending to cause it to be believed that it was endorsed by the person whose order it was payable; here A has committed forgery.
(d) A purchases an estate sold under execution of a decree against B. B, after the seizure of the estate, in collusion with Z, executes a lease of the estate of Z at a nominal rent and for a long period and dates the lease six months prior to the seizure, with intent to defraud A, and to cause it to be believed that the lease was granted before the seizure. B, though he executes the lease in his own name, commits forgery by antedating it.
(e) A, a trader, in anticipation of insolvency, lodges effects with B for A’s benefit, and with intent to defraud his creditors; and in order to give a colour to the transaction, writes a promissory note binding himself to pay to B a sum for value received, and antedates the note, intending that it may be believed to have been made before. A was on the point of insolvency. A has committed forgery under the first head of the definition.
Explanation 2- The making of a false document in the name of a fictitious person, intending it to be believed that the document was made by a real person, or in the name of a deceased person, intending it to be believed that the document was made by the person in his lifetime, may amount to forgery.
Illustration:
A draws a bill of exchange upon a fictitious person, and fraudulently accepts the bill in the name of such fictitious person with intent to negotiate it. A commits forgery.
An analysis of Sec 464 shows that there are three ways to make a false document:
- By making, signing, sealing or executing a document or part of a document, or by making or transmitting any electronic record or a part of any electronic thereof, or by affixing any digital signature on any electronic record.
- By altering a document or an electronic record. This clause requires dishonest or fraudulent cancellation or alteration of a document in any material part without lawful authority after it has been made or executed by a person who may be living or dead.
- By causing a person who is of unsound mind or intoxicated and does not know the contents of the document or electronic record or nature of the alteration, to sign, seal or execute or alter. This clause deals with the cases where the person making the document is not supposed to know its content owing to unsoundness of mind or intoxication or deception. When dealing with this clause refer to the Law of Insanity (S. 84 IPC) and the Law of Intoxication (Ss. 85 and 86)
There are three explanations attached to section 464 which explain three important aspects of this law.
According to Explanation 1, a man’s signature of his own name may amount to forgery. The illustrations under this explanation illustrate that the offender or the accused must have dishonest or fraudulent intention if he is to be held guilty. This explanation makes it sufficient clear that there may be sufficient falsity where a man only signs his own name if he does so in order that it may be mistaken for the signature of another person of the same name.
Example: If a cheque payable to B or order get into hands of A, who is another person of the same name as the payee and A knowing that he was not the real person in whose favour it was drawn, endorses it, he would be held guilty of forgery.
According to Explanation 2, the making of a false document in the name of a fictitious person with the intention that it may be believed that the document was made by a real person, or in the name of a deceased person with the intention that it may be believed that the document was made by a person when he was alive, may amount to forgery. This explanation makes it clear that a document will be forged if it is a false document even in a name of the fictitious person.
In Queen Empress v. Pera Raja, (1890) 13 Mad. 27 case, where the accused advertised that a book on English idioms by Robert S. Williams was ready and would be despatched against money sent. The accused wrote a letter under the signature of Robert S. Williams, that Robert S. Williams requested the postal authorities to pay money sent to R.S. Williams to one Seshagiri Rao and got the money himself signing receipts himself as Seshagiri Rao. It was found that both R.S. Williams and Seshagiri Rao were fictitious beings. The Court held that the accused was guilty of cheating and forgery.
According to Explanation 3, the expression “affixing electronic signature” shall have the same meaning as assigned to it by section 2(i) (d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
In Mohd Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751 case, the Supreme Court observed that a person is said to have made false document if:
- He made or executed a document claiming to be somebody else or authorized by someone else; or
- He altered or tampered a document; or
- He obtains a document practicing deception or form a person who is not in control of his/her senses
In Sheila Sebastian v. R.J. Jawahraj, (2018) 7 SCC 581 case, the Supreme Court talked about section 463 and section 464 of the IPC. It says that section 463 defines the offence of forgery while on the other hand section 464 substantiates the same by providing answer as to when a false document or an electronic record could be said to have been made for the purpose of committing the offence of forgery under section 463.
Common Types of Document Frauds:
Offenders often make fraudulent use of both false and genuine identity and travel documents in order to carry out their illegal activities.
False Documents:
- Counterfeit Documents: A counterfeit document is one that has been made from scratch to resemble an officially issued document but is an unauthorised reproduction. Even for experts, high quality counterfeits can be hard to identify.
- Forged Documents: A forged document is a genuine document which has been altered for a criminal purpose. Altering photographs and personal details are typical examples, but pages, visas and stamps may also be forged.
- Pseudo or Fantasy Documents: These have no legal basis; they are usually not based on any legitimate document but may have the physical appearance of a passport or identity card. However, they are not officially recognised and are not acceptable proof of either nationality or identity.
Genuine Documents:
- Fraudulently genuine documents obtained through theft, robbery, corruption, etc.
- Genuine documents misused by an impostor. This can include situations where the possessor of the document may look like the rightful owner.
Mode of Making False Document:
- Simulated or a copied forgery: In this variety of forgery, the rger chooses a model signature or writing and tries to replicate (clone) the design of letters and other broad features depending upon his ability, practice, and competency.
- Traced Forgery: This means reproducing the exact copy of the original signature. Traced forgery is accomplished by using carbon paper, indented tracing, tracing paper, transmitted light or scanned image.
- Forgery by Memory: It belongs to the signature or writing prepared of the material by the mental impressions of forms and letters of signatures or writings of the actual writer without examining any model or writing at the time of forgery.
- Forgery by Impersonation: When a person nearly writes or signs the name of another person in his own handwriting in a normal manner rather than expressing himself to be that person with some motive involved.
Notes:
- The offence of making a false document is complete as soon as a document is made with intent to commit a fraud.
- It is not necessary that the document should be made in the name of a really existing person. It may be in the name of a fictitious person.
- A general intention to defraud, without the intention of causing wrongful gain or loss to any particular person, is sufficient. There must however be a possibility of some person being defrauded.
- It is not an essential quality of the fraud mentioned in the section that it should result in, or aim at, deprivation of property.
- Concealment of an already practiced fraud, is fraud.
- If several persons combine to forge an instrument and each takes a distinct part in it, they are nevertheless all guilty.
- The word forgery is used in Section 463 as a general term and that section is referred to in a comprehensive sense in Section 195 CrPC. It comprises and embraces all species of forgery and thus includes a case falling under Section 467.
- Counterfeiting a document to support a legal claim will amount to forgery.
- Antedating a document may become forgery if the date is a material part of the forgery.
- A document made to conceal a previous fraudulent or dishonest act amounts to forgery. But such falsification is not forgery if it is only for the purpose of concealing a previous negligent act.
- A man’s signature of his own name may amount to forgery.
- Offence of forgery can be abetted.
Punishment for Forgery
Section 465 IPC:
Punishment for forgery
Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Nature of Offence: Non-Cognizable; Bailable; Non-Compoundable; and Triable by Magistrate of the First Class.
Conclusion:
For the offence of forgery under Section 463 intention is essential, five situations are provided in the section. To constitute it, some damage or injury must be intended to be caused by the false document to an individual or to the public. Under section 464, it is stated that the act should be done dishonestly or fraudulently. It is to be noted that when defining forgery Section 463 must be read with Section 464 making false document because the definition of a false document [S.464] is a part of the definition of forgery and that the intent contemplated in Section 464 is an intent not different in its quality and aim from that prescribed by Section 463. These two sections are, therefore, closely related and hence the illustrations of forgery are found only under Section 464. Section 465 provides for the punishment for forgery. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the intention of accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution also needs to prove various elements that are discussed in the sections.