The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a critical clarification regarding the initiation of criminal proceedings in cases of document forgery, stating that a complaint from the court is necessary only when the forgery occurs while the documents are in the court’s custody. This distinction was highlighted by Justice JS Bedi while quashing a Kurukshetra court order related to a case of forged documents used to secure the release of a truck involved in a 2000 accident.
The controversy stemmed from the appellate court’s 2009 decision to acquit two individuals convicted in 2007 for the forgery, citing noncompliance with Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). According to this section, a court cannot take cognizance of certain offenses unless there is a written complaint by the public servant concerned — in this case, a complaint from the court where the forgery occurred.
Justice Bedi noted that the documents, including surety bonds and affidavits, were forged outside the court’s jurisdiction and later submitted as evidence, which does not necessitate a court-filed complaint according to the law. This clarification came after the High Court examined an apex court judgment that differentiates between forgeries committed within court custody (custodia legis) and those committed externally.
