Case Note & Summary
The applicants, employees of the Bhandara District Milk Producers' Co-operative Federation, were accused of forging a letter dated 11th April 2007 and using it in proceedings before the Industrial Court, Bhandara, in ULP No. 82 of 2001. The Administrative Officer of the Federation lodged a complaint on 9th May 2007 alleging that the letter bore a forged signature, seal, and outward number. The police investigated and filed a charge-sheet for offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants filed an application for discharge before the Magistrate, which was rejected. They then filed a Criminal Revision before the Sessions Court, which was also dismissed. Aggrieved, they approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC. The High Court examined the applicability of Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC, which bars cognizance of offences under Sections 463 to 471 IPC when the document is produced in a court proceeding, unless a complaint is made by that court. The court noted that the alleged forged document was produced and used in the Industrial Court proceedings. Therefore, the Magistrate could not take cognizance without a complaint from the Industrial Court. The court also observed that the procedure under Section 340 CrPC for making a complaint was not followed. Consequently, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the applicants, holding that the prosecution was barred by law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Bar on Cognizance - Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC - Offence under Section 471 IPC - Where a document is alleged to be forged and is produced or used in evidence in a court proceeding, cognizance of the offence under Section 471 IPC can be taken only upon a complaint in writing by that court. The bar applies even if the forgery was committed prior to the proceeding. (Paras 6-8)
B) Criminal Procedure Code - Procedure for Complaint by Court - Section 340 CrPC - Before making a complaint, the court must hold a preliminary inquiry and form an opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice. Failure to follow this procedure renders the prosecution invalid. (Para 9)
C) Criminal Procedure Code - Inherent Powers - Section 482 CrPC - The High Court can quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of court when the prosecution is barred by law. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether criminal proceedings for forgery and using forged document as genuine can be initiated without a complaint by the court under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC when the document was allegedly forged and used in proceedings before the Industrial Court.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application and quashed the criminal proceedings against the applicants. The order of the Sessions Court dated 6th January, 2012 in Criminal Revision No. 64 of 2010 and the order of the Magistrate refusing to discharge the applicants were set aside.
Law Points
- Section 195 CrPC bars cognizance of offence under Section 471 IPC if document is produced in court proceedings without complaint by court
- Section 340 CrPC procedure for complaint by court
- Section 482 CrPC inherent powers to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (11) 179
Criminal Application (APL) No. 182 of 2012
Mr. Anil Mardikar, Senior Adv., with Mr. S.G. Joshi, Adv., for the applicants; Mr. A. Madiwale, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant
Ratnakar Dinkarrao Bohate, Chandrakant Hariji Balbudhe, Shyam Devrao Tembhare, Maroti Yelleyya Bongoniwar, Omprakash Chaturam Padole
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for forgery and using forged document as genuine.
Remedy Sought
The applicants sought quashing of the order dated 6th January, 2012 in Criminal Revision No. 64 of 2010 and the order of the Magistrate refusing to discharge them, and consequently quashing of the criminal proceedings.
Filing Reason
The applicants were charged with forging a letter dated 11th April, 2007 and using it in proceedings before the Industrial Court, Bhandara. They contended that the prosecution was barred under Section 195 CrPC as no complaint was made by the Industrial Court.
Previous Decisions
The Magistrate rejected the application for discharge. The Sessions Court dismissed the Criminal Revision No. 64 of 2010 on 6th January, 2012, confirming the Magistrate's order.
Issues
Whether the criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC are maintainable without a complaint by the Industrial Court under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC?
Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings?
Submissions/Arguments
The applicants argued that the alleged forged document was produced in proceedings before the Industrial Court, and therefore, cognizance of the offence under Section 471 IPC could only be taken upon a complaint by that court under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC. Since no such complaint was made, the prosecution was barred.
The State opposed the application, submitting that the bar under Section 195 CrPC does not apply as the forgery was committed prior to the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
Where a document is alleged to be forged and is produced or used in evidence in a court proceeding, the court can take cognizance of the offence under Section 471 IPC only upon a complaint in writing by that court under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC. The bar applies irrespective of when the forgery was committed. Failure to follow the procedure under Section 340 CrPC renders the prosecution invalid.
Judgment Excerpts
By this application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, a challenge is raised to the order dated 6th January, 2012 in Criminal Revision No. 64 of 2010 whereby the said proceedings filed on behalf of the present applicants have been dismissed and the order passed by the learned Magistrate refusing to discharge the applicants has been confirmed.
In view of the provisions of Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code without a complaint in writing by the Industrial Court.
Procedural History
The applicants filed ULP No. 82 of 2001 before the Industrial Court, Bhandara. A letter dated 9th April, 2007 was allegedly forged and filed in those proceedings. On 9th May, 2007, the Administrative Officer lodged a complaint. Police investigated and filed charge-sheet. Applicants filed discharge application before Magistrate, which was rejected. They filed Criminal Revision No. 64 of 2010 before Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 6th January, 2012. They then filed the present application under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 195, 340, 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B
