A 'Different' Series #10: Cheating Vs Forgery

Coverage of this Article

Difference Between Cheating And Forgery

-Cheating is defined as when someone, by deceiving another person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces that person to deliver or consent to the retention of any property or who intentionally induces that person to do or omit something that he would not do, and which act or omission causes harm to that person in any manner.

Cheating Case Laws

-In K R Kumaran vs. the State of Kerala (1961 CriLJ 98), a patient admitted to the hospital was examined by a doctor, who determined that the patient was in a situation where he would not live.

Forgery Case Laws

-In Jagannath Prasad v. State [(1963) 1 SCC 147], the Court held that whether the accused generated the document voluntarily or involuntarily without divulging it to the Court or whether he knows or appears to believe that the document produced by them is forged is immaterial for the accused's conviction under Section 471.

Conclusion

-As seen in the cases mentioned above, there have been cases where people have conducted immoral acts to attain benefits for themselves, but as it is rightly said, the truth can't be concealed for long.

Difference Between Cheating And Forgery

Cheating Case Laws

• In K R Kumaran vs. the State of Kerala (1961 CriLJ 98), a patient admitted to the hospital was examined by a doctor, who determined that the patient was in a situation where he would not live. The doctor collaborated with the other defendants to issue a life insurance policy for the person about to die, and he certified that he was healthy to do so. The accused did this to collect the money from the insurance company after the patient passed away. The Court found the defendant guilty of defrauding and tricking the insurance company into getting benefits. Under the IPC, the accused was found guilty of cheating.
• In Sushil Kumar Datta vs. State (1985 CriLJ 1948), the accused pretended to be a scheduled caste candidate and took the Indian Administrative Service test. He was assigned to that cadre because of his bogus claim to being a scheduled caste. The Court decided that he was guilty of cheating and that his conviction for cheating was justified.

Forgery Case Laws

• In Jagannath Prasad v. State [(1963) 1 SCC 147], the Court held that whether the accused generated the document voluntarily or involuntarily without divulging it to the Court or whether he knows or appears to believe that the document produced by them is forged is immaterial for the accused's conviction under Section 471.
• In Dr. Vimla v. Delhi Administration (AIR 1963 SC 1572), the Court held that if the accused receives no monetary or other sorts of benefit, he cannot be convicted of forging, and therefore Dr. Vimla was not found guilty of forgery under sections 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Conclusion

As seen in the cases mentioned above, there have been cases where people have conducted immoral acts to attain benefits for themselves, but as it is rightly said, the truth can't be concealed for long. Thus, the offenders have been penalized for the crimes they've committed. It is totally immoral to get an advantage by harming or misleading an innocent person. As a result, legislation against cheating and forging was enacted under sections 413 and 463 of the Indian Penal Code to protect citizens from such offenses.