https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90116 The HC set aside the District and Sessions Judge's order and upheld the Magistrate's charge-framing decision against both respondents. The court held that disputed document authenticity cannot be adjudicated at the charge-framing stage and must be established through evidence. Despite FSL confirming the complainant's signatures, the allegation of content fabrication in blank cheques and letterheads created prima facie cases for theft against the first respondent and forgery under Sections 467/471/34 IPC against both respondents. The Sessions Judge erred by prematurely applying NI Act presumptions under Sections 139 and 118, which exceeded the scope of charge-framing proceedings that only require prima facie involvement assessment. en-us Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:42 +0530 Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90116 The HC set aside the District and Sessions Judge's order and upheld the Magistrate's charge-framing decision against both respondents. The court held that disputed document authenticity cannot be adjudicated at the charge-framing stage and must be established through evidence. Despite FSL confirming the complainant's signatures, the allegation of content fabrication in blank cheques and letterheads created prima facie cases for theft against the first respondent and forgery under Sections 467/471/34 IPC against both respondents. The Sessions Judge erred by prematurely applying NI Act presumptions under Sections 139 and 118, which exceeded the scope of charge-framing proceedings that only require prima facie involvement assessment. Highlights Indian Laws Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:42 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90116