.jpg)
What is Section 471 IPC?
Section 471 IPC says that “Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document or electronic record which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document or electronic record, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document or electronic record.”
What are the ingredients of Section 471 IPC?
The ingredients of Section 471 are:
(i) The document or electronic record is a forged one.
(ii) There must be fraudulent or dishonest use of a document as genuine.
(iii) The person using it must have knowledge or reason to believe that the document is a forged one.
The use of forged document must be voluntary one. In order to sustain conviction under Section 471, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove that accused knew or had reason to believe that the document is a forged one.
What is a forged document or electronic record?
Section 470 IPC defines a forged document or electronic record as a false document or electronic record made wholly or in part by forgery.
In the landmark judgment of Ibrahim and Ors v/s State of Bihar and Anr, it was held that a person is said to have made a false document if he has:
(i) made a document claiming to be someone else.
(ii) tampered or altered with the content of document.
(iii) practiced deception to obtain a certain document from a person who is not in control of his senses.
Section 471 includes forger as well
Section 471 not only covers a person who uses the forged document but also a forger who forges the document and then makes use of it. So, if a person is found guilty of the offence of forgery and makes use of such a document, then he/she will be equally punished under Section 471.
What is the punishment for Section 471 IPC?
The punishment for Section 471 IPC is same as for forgery of a document described under Section 465 IPC. So, a person shall be punished with the imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 472 - Making or possessing seal etc. with intent to commit forgery
According to Section 472 IPC - “Whoever makes or counterfeits any plate, seal or other instrument for making an impression and intend to use the same for the purpose of forgery shall be punishable under Section 467 of the code or with such intent, has in his possession any such seal, plate or any other instrument knowing the same to be counterfeit will be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a particular term that may extend to seven years and will be liable to fine.”
Section 474 - Having possession of documents described in the section 466 or 467; knowing to be forged or intended to use it as a genuine
According to Section 474 IPC – “Whoever has a possession of any document or electronic record, knowing the same to be forged and intending that the same will be fraudulently or dishonestly be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if the document is one of the description mentioned in section 467, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description, for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
Landmark judgments of Section 471 IPC:
1. Harish Chander Verma Vs. Mohinder Kumar Verma, 2019
The petitioner and respondents were the real brothers who were involved in a dispute over the subject property. Respondent had filed a suit for permanent injunction in capacity of his mother’s attorney. He had filed a copy of Power of Attorney purportedly executed by his mother by which he was authorized to file the suit. He had also shown the sale agreement to showcase ownership of his mother. However, this suit was dismissed. Subsequently, respondent had filed another suit, this time claiming the subject property was owned by his father.
The petitioner claimed that the respondent had filed forged and fabricated documents. On the contrary, respondent had argued that there was nothing on record to showcase that the documents were forged.
The High Court held that the mere non-production of original documents or not bringing the mother on the Court would not lead to proof of the alleged forgery. Hence, the petition was dismissed.
2. Akil Ahmad Vs. State of Uttarakhand, 2019
The instant application was filed for quashing FIR registered against the applicant under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused-applicant and respondent-complainant had entered into a compromise whereby the loss suffered by respondent was duly compensated and dispute between both the parties was amicably settled. The complainant had no grudge or grievance against the accused-applicant and therefore, he was not interested in further prosecution.
The Court observed that though the complainant can be permitted to enter into the compromise for offences according to the Sections of 406 and 420 IPC, but for the offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC, the complainant has no right to enter into a compromise with the accused. However, it was opined that since complainant and accused had willingly and amicably arrived at compromise; and complainant was not interested in further prosecution, it would be futile to permit future trial as it would not reach to its logical and correct conclusion as there is great possibility of witnesses turning hostile.
