LIST OF CASES

I. Nujeebutoolah v. Emp

II. LK Siddoppa v. Llithamma

III. Pramatha Nath v State

IV. Kotamraju Venkatrayudu v. Emperor

V. RK Dalmia v. Delhi Administration

VI. Emperor v. Ragho Ram

VII. Kotamraju Venkatrayudu v. Emperor

VIII. Naga Ba Thein v Emperor

IX. Empress v. Appasami

X. Emperor v Ali Hasan

INTRODUCTION

A person is reported to produce false documents or fake electronic records that make, sign, seal, or
execute a record or part of a document dishonestly or fraudulently. Who creates, transmits, or adds
electronic signatures on an electronic record 1, or who labels the implementation of the certificate or the
genuineness of the electronic signature. Also, expenses, promissorial slips, certificates, deposits, leases,
deeds, account books and many more may be included in the tools of forgery. Forgery is described as a
crime by legislation. The sentence here is normally a fee, a court time or both. Forgery techniques
include composing letters, copying, gravuring and typing. When an unauthentic writing is purposely
presented as real, it is the accompanying offense to express a forged document.

Explanation 1 says here that forgery will lead to the signature of a man of his own title.

False Writing: The concept of forgery is not followed by all documents. The written text in dispute must
be both lawful and false, as mentioned below, to form the basis for forgery claims.

The writing must be obviously legal. The writing in question may seem to have clear legitimate value in
order to be prosecuted as forgery. A document does not necessarily need to be a legal document or a
document issued by government to have legal significance-it just affects legal rights and obligations.
Records, including letters of recommendation or medical reports, could also therefore be falsified. In
contrast, it is probably not forgery to sign another person's name in a letter to a friend, because it would
in the most cases not be legal.

EVOLUTION

In 1983, with the disclosure of Hitler's diaries the most prominent forgery event in the twentieth century
happened, contributing to the development of forgery legislation. The diaries contained allegedly
passages written between 1932 and 1945 by German dictator Adolf Hitler. Gerd Heidemann, the
German stern magazine reporter, had requested that the texts be genuine and sold them. He obtained
these in military memorabilia and documents from Konrad Kujau, a Stuttgart dealer. Newsweek
magazines and Paris Match also charged more than five million dollars for the papers, alone with other
newspapers. Major world news sources promptly published important reports detailing the historical
information which the newspapers supposedly contained world-wide research experts, but later
performed forensic investigations of the diaries and found the papers to be false. Next, Kujau
acknowledged that he suddenly postponed the forging of papers and news sources. Kujau and
Heidemann were both sentenced to four years and a half in German prisons, but not before the public
became humiliated by Hitler's autographs in a show case.

1
Substituted by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 (10 of 2009), s 51 for the Words ‘digital
signature’ (wef 27-10-2009)
MEANING AND EXPLANATION

Mens Rea and Actus Rea in Forgery

With objective to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed-

It amounts to fraud to make an in whole or in part false document with the intention to commit fraud or
that fraud could be committed. It is not relevant whether or not fraud is effective. Fraud means a
deception-intension and a possible risk of injury by fraud. The rewards to be protected or to be
damaged are not restricted to land2. An intentional use of a coerced paper in order to support an
argument can be called a defrauding motive. Anyone else's authority to enter his name for acceptance is
no forgery3. Where a married woman gave her husband the authority to file documents on her behalf
and husband forged her signature in a complaint in order to prevent it from being prohibited, he was
not convicted in a misdemeanor or fraud in his hands, although this was an inappropriate act.

Case: Nujeebutoolah v. Emp4

The perpetrator who had the true signature of the signing person on a falsified certificate, mixed
together with other actual signature papers, cannot be found guilty of pardon because he had not
insulted the signing individual, who was free to pass through the documentation before signing the
contract.

Announcing a document to save an appeal constitutes a forgery. If a person actively participates in the
preparation of a document but does not contribute in writing the name of the performers, he cannot be
held guilty of forgery. Where the perpetrator, after his official's signature of the bill, placed legitimate
charges in his travel allowance, he was not found to commit forgery as it was impossible to prove his
deceptive or fraudulent motive.

To make false record-

"Making a document or a part of it" is not to compose or print a document, but to sign or perform it
otherwise, and so it includes adding a document or a part of a document to a signature or a document
that is conscious that it does not include a seal or a signature and that he has not allowed any of its
binding5.

Causing false document to be created –

Note that a person who is to be liable for forgery must create a false document or a part of a false
document, and not merely be responsible for making it, in compliance with the first clause of this
Article. One aspect is to create a false paper and it is another to render one.

Importance of the existence and execution of the document –

2
Refer to synopsis notes under Section 464, IPC
3
Pramatha Nath v State 52 Cr LJ 1480, AIR 1951 Cal 581, p 583
4
Nujeebutoolah v. Emp, (1868)9 WR (Cr) 20
5
Kotamraju Venkatrayudu v. Emperor (1905) ILR 28 Mad 90, 2 Cr Lj 283 (FB)
Case: LK Siddoppa v. Llithamma6

The accused was granted the imprint invitation of marriage, on behalf of two individuals without
jurisdiction, and requested friends and family to remind the appellant, worthy, attractive or young
people of the marriage of the accused, of heritage of considerable wealth.

Document for concealing fraud-

Case: RK Dalmia v. Delhi Administration7

In this Supreme Court case, where misleading entries have been made to cover up the theft of funds and
to conceal further the already executed fraudulent act, agreed with the assumptions in case Emperor v.
Ragho Ram. Thus, the instances, arguing that no false document is made in such a situation, cannot be
regarded as good law.

Dishonesty-

It is essential for the intent of forgery to demonstrate that there has been a fraudulent intension to
trigger wrongful advantage to one or wrongful damage to another. Really, it is not capable of causing
unjustified gain or unjust loss.

Fraudulent-

Two things are part of the word 'norm' which is deception and harm.

Case: Kotamraju Venkatrayudu v. Emperor8

An institution test admission certificate has been forged. Most judges concluded that the goal was to
gain profit and the resulting damage to the university, which is why the act could be said to be
fraudulent.

Intention to defraud-

Case: Naga Ba Thein v Emperor9

The defendant, who applied for appointed to the Land Register Department with false declaration,
attached to this application several certificates, one of which was clearly a fake, with the intent of
obtaining a lucrative appointment through disappointment, that is to say, to make himself a wrongful
profit. The accused was held dishonest, he was condemned to a legitimate fault under Articles 465 and
471 of the IPC.

Case: Empress v. Appasami10

By misrepresenting himself as a VAD, led the university official to give him a ticket entitling him to access
the test room for admission, the VAD document. To order to make it reasonable to conclude the text

6
LK Siddoppa v. Llithamma 1954 Cr Lj 1235, AIR 1954 Mys 119, pp 120-21
7
RK Dalmia v. Delhi Administration 1967 Cr LJ 787, AIR 1967 Mys 86; Re Gopala Krishna Geggade 11 Cr LJ 401
8
Kotamraju Venkatrayudu v. Emperor (1905) ILR 28 Mad 90, 2 Cr Lj 283 (FB)
9
Naga Ba Thein v Emperor 25Cr LJ 129 (Burma)
10
Empress v. Appasami (1888) ILR 12 Mad 151, p 152, 1 weir 480
was created by VAD, the accused was convicted of fiction, he was found to be guilty of fraud by writing
the exam paper.

Altered document shouldn't be lawfully accurate and valid-

There is no provision in this portion of a statute, updated within the context of this clause, to be lawful
and successful in order to warrant the crime of making a false document under the conditions set out in
that law.

It has been claimed in some cases that it is a valid defense to counterfeit if the claimant has reason to
believe they have the power to create a comparable text. It is also a valid defense if the person does not
have the specific intention needed to use the records to mislead someone else. If a forgery requires
using the signature of another party, it is a shield when the person has actually allowed the perpetrator
to use his or her signature. Unless the forgery is created in many jurisdictions, the person is not
prosecuted.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

I. If it is issued by the correct controller or certifying authority, does the electronic data affixed
with a digital signature conform with the evidence law?

(Souvik Mridha & Shreshtha Gupta, Utility of Digital Signature in India, 2008)

In compliance with the Indian Evidence Act, digital signature is accepted under Section 73-A: Proof to
validate digital signature.

The act requires the digital signature holder to provide proofs. The court asks the holder to submit the
certificate. When true, the Court shall take the text as proof (primary or secondary as the case may be)
into consideration. According to Sec 73-A of the Act electronic data is legally recognized. When a digital
signature is applied, the court sees whether it is issued by the appropriate certifying authority under
evidence law.

Sec 73-A(a) specifies the "that individual or controller, or certification authority, shall issue an electronic
certificate of signature" provided it is given by an authorized controller or certifying authority, which
ensures that the Act acknowledges the piece of electronic data attached to a digital signature. Electronic
data and electronic signatures are an emerging area of rule, but Indian legislation seeks by numerous
changes to current laws and the incorporation of IT Act of 2000 11 to cope with this digital period.

The I.T. Act absolutely opened up a new horizon. It is a method for coping with cyber abuse and other
violations, and it includes punishments for crimes. When the internet age entered every day, computer
offences were committed and the Indian Penal Code was broken, including intellectual property laws.
The existing legislation was not adequate. New laws will be implemented in due course, and much more
improvements will be required in future because the World Wide Web will be more accessible. In 1988,
the following safety criteria for such digital signature systems were set forward by Shafi Goldwasser,
Silvio Micali and Ronald Rivest. In the early phase, most of the signatures created were the same, with
use of a trapdoor permutation like an RSA function, etc.
11
Emperor v Ali Hasan (1906) ILR 28 ALL 358
 II. Which are the intricacies and purposes of criminal prosecution in forgery cases?

(PhD. Adrian, IACOB, Investigation in Case of Forgery & Its Uses, 2010)

The material objects of the crime of forgery (coins, certificates, loans, seals, labels, official activities etc.)
establish an obvious genuine and authentic imitation. Changes are made by modifying the contents of
the seized item by adjusting the object's details. The substantive item in the event of derivative offences
shall be committed through acts other than those indicated by a forgery offence, such as: issuance of an
emblem or image of the Red Cross, the use of fabricated valuables, etc.

This effect is implied by committing the offense, because the law generally does not require that the
offense exists in respect to a specific outcome. Under certain cases, some of the acts charged under this
section will lead to injury if it causes a result that is not contingent on, but induces 12. Since the forgery
offence is a serious risk offense, the result is not included in the regulation, and the identification of
causality does not create difficulties, as the immediate impact is the implicated outcome of the action
undertaken.

Both offences known as forgery are performed directly or indirectly as far as the fault form is involved.
Since some offences have a purpose clearly stated by the law as a necessary requirement for the
subjective aspect, the type of error is direct intention in such cases. In such a case, the perpetrator
anticipates that its contents may turn out to be incorrect by counteracting or modifying an item,
behavior, etc. so continues to execute the operation and, throughout effect, to create a risky position. In
most instances, the reason for deception can be greed and the desire to gain massive profits quickly.
Even you do not need the motivation by law to identify and demonstrate that it is extremely important
to personalize crime and to take precautions or safety action. It will be useful, although it is not clear in
the text of the law, to decide the intent of these crimes as a function of the moral nature, to define it to
have the proper individualization of the punishment.

The published paper forgery ‘The new criminal code’ uses the term writ instead of document which was
used before and is often used to apply to a legal document as "negotium," not just as a written
document, but lays forth contracts. There is also a "deed" with these two words which may assign a
deed and any other item expected to validate with the actual truth technically or traditionally.

CONCLUSION

The offence of forgery is not punished in most states without the crime of forgery except if the forgery is
made for the reason of cheating, deliberate of deceit or malicious attempts to perform a theft or
larceny. For example, art works can be reproduced or copied without a crime unless someone tries to
sell or to represent the copies as originals. In such cases, the copies would be illegal forgery. Fake or
fraudulent documents may also be created. It may include the photocopying and arbitrary placement of
the signature of a person on a paper without his consent or knowledge. Forgery charges often decrease
to intent. When you face allegations of forgery, the prosecution will finally focus on motive since it can
be hard to prove, and note, it is the prosecutor's job to justify his aim beyond reasonable doubt. The
skilled criminal defense lawyer will assist you to establish evidence and case studies. Whether you're
guilty of forgery or the perpetrator of forgery, consulting with a prosecutor is a good idea. A criminal
12
lawyer can explain the details of forgery laws to you. Sign the name of someone else to a check is the
most common form of forgery. It can also be fake currency and consumer products, but this activity is
technically called counterfeiting.