https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308530 Forgery under the Indian Penal Code requires proof that the accused made, signed, altered, or caused the false document to be made within Section 464. Mere participation in the transaction, benefit from the document, or execution of a later document is insufficient. Because the record did not show that either respondent was the maker of the impugned power of attorney, and the evidence pointed to an imposter as the maker, the offence of forgery was not established. The criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt was not met, so the acquittal was upheld. en-us Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jul 2026 17:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308530 Forgery under the Indian Penal Code requires proof that the accused made, signed, altered, or caused the false document to be made within Section 464. Mere participation in the transaction, benefit from the document, or execution of a later document is insufficient. Because the record did not show that either respondent was the maker of the impugned power of attorney, and the evidence pointed to an imposter as the maker, the offence of forgery was not established. The criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt was not met, so the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308530