INTRODUCTION

This article deals with Chapter XVIII of IPC related to Offences Relating to Documents and
Property Marks. This Chapter contains Secs. 463 to 489-E. The elements of fraud and dishonesty
are present in the mind of offender in order to bring the conduct of the defendant under the cover
of this chapter. The offence of forgery has existed since the time of the invention of writing.
Forgery means making a false instrument with the intention of deceiving person. The main
difference between cheating and forgery is that cheating is done verbally while committing fraud,
elsewhere it is written in forgery. Because the mischief caused by the offence of forgery in terms
of value is proportionately high, then penalties provided are also often severe.
OFFENCES RELATING TO DOCUMENTS
A. FORGERY
Forgery means false making of any writing with intent to defraud which, might apparently be the
foundation of a legal liability. Sec. 463 of IPC defines forgery as:
“whoever makes any false document or electronic record or part of a document or electronic
record 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,
or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.”
The essential ingredients of ‘ forgery ‘ are as follows:
1) making a false or fraudulent electronic record or part thereof
2) making such records with the intention of:
a) causing damage or harm to the public or to any person; or
b) supporting any statement or title, or
c) causing any person to part with property, or
d) entering into any express or implied contract; or
e) making any claim or title part thereof.
In Daniel Hailey Walcott v State of Madras1, the Madras HC defined the main elements of the
forgery as follows:
1. the document or part of the document must be in fact false;
2. it must have been made in a deceptive or fraudulent manner within the meaning of the
words used in s 464, IPC, and
3. it must have been made with one of the reasons set out in s 463, IPC.
Noor Ahemad vs. Jagadish Chandra Sen2 In this case the accused tampered the electoral rolls.
Thus he caused injury to the public. Voting rights of some of the voters were affected. He was held
guilty under this Section.

1
AIR 1968 Mad 349
2
AIR 1934 Cal. 839
 B. MAKING A FALSE ELECTRONIC RECORD OR FALSE DOCUMENT
Sec. 464 IPC, talks about what amounts to making a false report or false electronic record. The
person making a false report or a false electronic record commits falsification. It is important that
once created, the false report or the false digital record should either appear on its face or be one
that, if it were real, would have some legal validity.
S 464 defines three ways in which false electronic record or document can be made:
1. by making, reviewing, signing or executing a document or a part thereof; or by making or
transmitting any electronic record or part thereof; or by adding an electronic signature to
any electronic record;
2. by modifying a record or electronic record;
3. by causing a person who is innocent of the content or nature of the alteration made to a
document or electronic record to sign, seal or execute the document.
To make a false document or an electronic record means to make a document or an electronic
record or part thereof, to perform a document or an electronic record or to sign a document or an
electronic record in a fraudulent or deceptive manner. A fake report is also said to have been made
when the signature, the seal or the date is incorrect.
C. FORGED DOCUMENT COMPREHENDS CREATING A NEW DOCUMENT
The definition of the false document is broad to include not only the act of adding false signatures
to documents but also the act of making or producing entirely new documents.
In Province of Bihar v Surendra Prasad3, it was held that, in a case involving an accusation of the
production of a completely new document, the issue was whether the act of signing or creating the
document was performed in a fraudulent manner and was intended to make it appear that the
document, or any part thereof, was produced, signed or sealed or executed by the authority of a
person by whom or by whose author it was created.
D. PUNISHMENT FOR FORGERY
Sec. 465 of IPC provides for the punishment of forgery which says that “whoever commits forgery
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both.” The offence under this Section is non-cognizable, bailable non-
compoundable, and triable by Magistrate of the first class.
E. ATTESTATION OF A FORGED DOCUMENT
Where a person attests a forged document without knowing the nature of the document cannot be
deemed as an offender. However if a person attests a forged document knowing it to be a forged
document, he shall be guilty of offence of forgery under Sec. 464.

3
AIR 1951 Pat 86
Sec. 470 defines forged document as “A false document made wholly or in part by forgery is
designated as a forged document”
Sec. 29 defines document as “the word “document” denotes any matter expressed or described
upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means,
intended to be used, or which may be used as evidence of that matter.
Sec. 30 defines electronic record as it shall have the meaning assigned to them in clause(f) sub-
section (1) of section (2) of the information technology act 2000
Sec. 30 defines Valuable security as, the words “valuable security” denote a document which is,
or purports to be, a document whereby any legal right is created, extended, transferred, restricted,
extin-guished or released, or where by any person acknowledges that he lies under legal liability,
or has not a certain legal right. Illustration A writes his name on the back of a bill of exchange. As
the effect of this endorsement is transfer the right to the bill to any person who may become the
lawful holder of it, the endorse­ment is a “valuable security”.
Documents can be forged by mechanical means or by affixing own signature
F. AGGRAVATED FORMS OF FORGERY

1. Forgery of documents, public records and so on – Sec. 466

2. Forgery of ‘valuable security’, ‘will’ and so on – Sec. 467
3. Forgery for the purposes of cheating -Sec. 468
4. Forgery for the purposes of harming reputation – Sec. 469
OFFENCE RELATING TO PROPERTMARKS
Sec. 479 describes property mark as “denoting a mark placed on a moveable property belongs to
a particular person.”
It signifies that it belongs to a particular person with the implication that it distinguishes other
people’s right to the same property. The objective of such provision is to protect one’s goods from
other people’s fraudulent imitation. The fundamental principle underlying tis branch of law is that
no one is entitled to pose as his own goods belonging to another, and thus give the impression that
the goods he represents belong to him. Therefore, no person is allowed to use another’s logos,
symbols, signs or tools, without their permission, thus deceiving the potential consumer with the
false representation.
Punishment for using a false property mark is given under Sec. 482 IPC which says that “whoever
uses any false property mark shall unless he proves that he acted without intent to defraud, be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with
fine, or with both.”
SCOPE OF SECTIONS 479, 481, 482 IPC
A mark used to denote that a particular person belongs to some movable property is called a
property tag. A person is said to use a false property mark:
 1. If he marks any movable property or goods or any case, box, or receptacle containing
movable property or goods; or (ii) uses any case, package or other receptacle containing
any mark thereon;
2. in a manner reasonably calculated to cause it to be believed that the property or good is so
marked, or any property or goods found therein. Belong to a person to whom they do not
belong (s 481);
3. The offender shall be liable to one year’s imprisonment or both (s 482).
Following are the provisions related to property marks under IPC:
1. Section 479 – Defines a mark of property;
2. Section 481 – deals with the use of a mark of false property;
3. Section 482 – Punishment for the use of a mark of false property;
4. Section 483 – Counterfeiting of a mark of property used by another;
5. Section 484 – Counterfeiting of a mark used by a public servant;
6. Section 485 – Making or possession of any instrument for the forfeiting of a mark of
property;
7. Section 486 –Selling goods marked with a counterfeit mark of property;
8. Section 487 and 488—Deceiving a false mark to a public servant.
Counterfeiting a mark used by a public servant
The ingredients of s 484 may be specified as:
1. counterfeiting of
2. a property mark used by a public servant or any mark used by a public servant
3. denoting that any product was produced by a particular person or at a particular time or
place
4. that the property was of a particular quality
5. passed through a particular office
6. that the property was manufactured by a particular person or place.
The punishment imposed if these ingredients are established is imprisonment for three years and
fine.
CASE LAWS
In Emperor v Dahyabhai Chakasha4, the National Bank of India used to import gold bars for sale
in India. Each bar was of uniform size, weight and purity and had the words’ National Bank of
India’ engraved on it as a property mark. The gold so imported was known on the market as
Nasrana Bak and acquired a special value on the market.

4
(1904) 6 Bom LR 513
n Roshan Singh v Emperor5, the accused imitated the famous 501 soap plaintiffs by inserting his
soap of exactly the same length, No 301, which was held guilty under s 482, the only difference
being that the accused had inserted digit 3 instead of digit 5 in the plaintiff’s soap.
E. L.K. Siddappa vs. Lalithamma6, with an intention to defame the complainant/Lalithamma, the
accused printed false marriage invitation cards and distributed. The accused was convicted of the
offence of forgery under Sec. 463.
F. G.S. Bansal vs. Delhi Administration7, the accused encashed the post office national saving
certificates after making necessary endorsements and signatures of the deceased. He also attested
them. The Supreme Court held that the accused was guilty of the offence of forgery under Sec.
463.

5
AIR 1947 All 87
6
1954 CrLJ 1235 Mysore
7
AIR 1963 SC 439