Forgery and cheating in fiscal dispute held unsustainable; absence of authorship proof and inception deception led to quashing

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 482 CrPC is described as a safeguard against misuse of criminal process, but not as a licence for threshold appreciation of evidence. In a dispute arising from import, customs clearance and later fiscal proceedings, the absence of original transit declarations, forensic or handwriting material, and proof that either petitioner authored the disputed signatures meant forgery under Sections 463, 464 and 468 IPC was not disclosed. The complaint also failed to show deception at the inception of the transaction, cheating by personation or conspiracy. The criminal case was treated as an abuse of process and the FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance order were quashed.....