TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in the absence of a complaint by the civil court, prosecution for offences under Sections 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of a forged document produced in a civil proceeding was barred by Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: Section 195(1)(b)(ii) prohibits cognizance of offences described in Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code, and of offences punishable under Section 471, when the alleged offence is committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in court, except on a complaint in writing by that court or a court to which it is subordinate. Section 463 defines forgery, while Section 467 punishes a particular aggravated form of forgery relating to valuable security, receipt, or similar documents. The offence under Section 467 is therefore an offence described in Section 463. The same statutory bar applies where the forged receipt was produced in the civil suit and no complaint had been made by the civil court. The reasoning of the earlier decisions relied upon supported this construction.
Conclusion: The prosecution was not maintainable in the absence of a complaint by the civil court, and the complaint case was liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a forged document is produced in court, cognizance of an offence under Section 467 or Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be taken except upon a complaint in writing by the court before which the document was produced, because Section 467 is an offence described in Section 463 and falls within the statutory bar in Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
