Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 1986, decided on 8th February, 1986.
‑‑‑Ss. 463 to 468‑‑Forgery‑‑Ingredients‑‑Recording false note, whether constitutes forgery‑‑Recording false note on application for allotment would not constitute forgery‑‑A false note was recorded by accused on an application to the effect that applicant was an allottee of plot of land, although there was no allotment order‑‑Allegation against accused that he recorded a false note, held, would not fall within definition of forgery under 5.463, P.P.C. punishable under S. 468, Penal Code.
M. Aslam Riaz for Petitioner.
Muhammad Zafar Yasin for the State.
This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Sargodha and Faisalabad Divisions with headquarters at Sargodha whereby he on 9‑1‑1986 while acquitting Ghulam Samdani and 4 others, co‑accused convicted Abdul Hameed appellant under section 468, P.P.C. and sentenced him to three months, S.I.
2. The appellant was employed in Housing and Physical Planning Department, Faisalabad. The charge against him was that he made a false report on the application of Mst. Zainab Bibi P.W. 6 that she was allottee of the plot of land whereas there was no allotment order in her favour. The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
3. To prove its case, the prosecution produced 13 witnesses.
4. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. the appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the allegations as well as the findings of the learned trial Court that the appellant had made a wrong note on the application of Mst. Zainab Bibi that she was allottee of plot of land, does not amount to forgery punishable under section 468, P.P.C. The learned counsel for the State has not been able to controvert him.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I feel persuaded to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. The prosecution case is that Mst. Zainab Bibi P.W. 6 moved) application Exh. P.H. for allotment of plot in Kachi Abadi Factory Area to' the Secretary Housing Committee, Faisalabad. The petition was processed by Abdul Hameed appellant and that although there was no allotment order in the relevant file yet the appellant wrote a note on the application to the effect that she was allottee of the plot of land. I feel the allegations against the appellant does not fall within the definition of forgery under section 463, P.P.C. The relevant provisions may be reproduced conveniently:‑‑
"Whoever makes any false document or part of document, with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery:"
"A person is said to make a false document:‑‑
First. Who dishonestly or fraudulently makes, signs, seals or executes a document or part of a document, or makes any mark denoting the execution of a document, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document or part of document was made, signed, sealed or executed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed; or
Secondly. Who without lawful authority dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or otherwise, alters a document in any material part thereof, after it has been made or executed either by himself or by any other person, whether such person be living or dead at the time of such alteration; or
Thirdly. Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document, knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or that by reason of deception practised upon him, he does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration:"
It is very much obvious that giving of a false note on some application, does not amount to forgery punishable under section 468, P.P.C.
7. For what has been said above, the appeal is accepted and the appellant is acquitted of the charge.
M.Y.H./A‑49/L Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer