This Criminal Appeal arises from the judgment of learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Sargodha, whereby he on 19-11-1985 convicted Abdul Hamid appellant under section 468/34, P.P.C.
And sentenced him to 11 months' R.I.
2. The, charge against the appellant was that he and his co-accused in furtherance of their common intention prepared false record with the purpose of creating title of Plot No. 40-Y-5 in the area of Development Scheme No. 213/R.G. In favour of Shafqat Nazir co-accused. As for the petitioner, it has been alleged that on the application made by Shafqat Nazir he made following reports on 9-5-1978 and 22-10-1978. Which were subsequently found to be false.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the allegation, that the appellant had made false report accepted at its face value, the offence does not fall within the ambit of forgery as defined an section 463, P.P.C. Punishable under section 468, P.P.C. Conversely, learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned coup for the parties with care. I find that there is sufficient force an the arguments addressed by the learned counsel 'for the appellant.
Sections 463 and 464 may be reproduced advantageously.
Sec. 463, P.P.C. "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."
Sec. 468, P.P.C. "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 a 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 believing 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, lie does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration."
From the examination of the aforesaid provisions of law, it is very much, clear that making of a false or incorrect report on some application does not tantamount to making a false document. So, I am of the view that the conviction and sentence of the appellant is liable to be set aside on this short ground alone.
5. For what has been said above, the appeal is accepted and the appellant is acquitted of the charge.