Passage Based Questions- 3: Criminal Law | Legal Reasoning for CLAT PDF Download

Read the passage given and answer the following questions:

Section 336 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) defines forgery as making a false document or electronic record with intent to cause damage, injury, or fraud, or to support a false claim to property or rights. The false document must be created or altered dishonestly, intending that it be acted upon as genuine. Punishment includes imprisonment up to seven years and a fine. Section 337 extends forgery to using a forged document as genuine, with the same punishment. The offense is cognizable and non-bailable. Intent to deceive is critical, and mere errors or unintentional alterations do not constitute forgery. For example, forging a signature on a property deed to secure fraudulent ownership is forgery. Courts assess the accused’s knowledge, the document’s falsity, and potential harm. Defenses include lack of fraudulent intent, consent from the affected party, or proving the document was genuine. The prosecution must establish that the accused knowingly created or altered the document to deceive. Forgery often involves financial transactions, contracts, or official records, impacting trust in legal systems. If the forged document is used to cause actual loss, additional charges like cheating may apply. The law aims to deter fraudulent practices that undermine economic and social stability. Victims may seek civil remedies alongside criminal prosecution.

Scenario: Rakesh, a bank employee, fabricates a loan agreement with a forged signature of his client, Meera, to secure Rs. 5 lakh for personal use. He submits the agreement to the bank, but the fraud is detected before the loan is disbursed. Meera was unaware of the document.

Q1: What is the key requirement for an act to constitute forgery under Section 336 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
(A) Causing actual financial loss
(B) Intent to deceive
(C) Lack of owner’s consent
(D) Temporary use of property

View Answer  

Answer: (B) Intent to deceive
Explanation: The passage states that forgery under Section 336 requires creating or altering a false document with intent to deceive, critical to the offense.
Why other options are incorrect: (A) Actual loss is not required; (C) Consent relates to theft, not forgery; (D) Temporary use applies to misappropriation, not forgery.

Q2: What is the bail status for forgery under Section 336 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
(A) Bailable
(B) Bailable only with court approval
(C) Non-bailable
(D) Non-cognizable

View Answer  

Answer: (C) Non-bailable
Explanation: The passage specifies that forgery under Section 336 is cognizable and non-bailable.
Why other options are incorrect: (A) Bailable applies to lesser offenses like simple misappropriation; (B) Court approval is not mentioned; (D) Forgery is cognizable, not non-cognizable.

Q3: Naveen, a student, alters a digital mark sheet to inflate his grades, intending to secure a scholarship. The university detects the forgery before awarding the scholarship. What offense is Naveen most likely liable for, and what is the maximum punishment?
(A) Forgery under Section 336, up to seven years’ imprisonment
(B) Using a forged document, up to two years’ imprisonment
(C) Cheating, up to five years’ imprisonment
(D) Dishonest misappropriation, up to two years’ imprisonment

View Answer  

Answer: (A) Forgery under Section 336, up to seven years’ imprisonment
Explanation: The passage defines forgery under Section 336 as altering a false electronic record (digital mark sheet) with intent to deceive, punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine, as Naveen does.
Why other options are incorrect: (B) Using a forged document (Section 337) doesn’t apply as Naveen created the record; (C) Cheating requires actual loss; (D) Misappropriation involves property, not documents.

Q4: Ayesha, a financial advisor, uses a forged corporate bond certificate to convince a client, Sameer, to invest Rs. 10 lakh. The client verifies the certificate and discovers the fraud before investing. Which provision makes Ayesha liable, and what defense might she raise?
(A) Section 336, claiming actual loss occurred
(B) Section 337, claiming lack of fraudulent intent
(C) Section 336, claiming the document was genuine
(D) Section 337, claiming financial gain

View Answer  

Answer: (B) Section 337, claiming lack of fraudulent intent
Explanation: The passage states that using a forged document as genuine under Section 337, as Ayesha does, carries up to seven years’ imprisonment. A defense of lacking fraudulent intent is viable, as the passage notes it can negate liability.
Why other options are incorrect: (A) Section 336 applies to creating, not using, documents; actual loss isn’t required; (C) Claiming the document is genuine applies to both sections but is unlikely given verification; (D) Financial gain supports liability, not a defense.

Q5: Jatin, an artist, forges a certificate of authenticity for a painting to sell it to a gallery for Rs. 2 lakh, knowing the painting is a replica. The gallery owner suspects fraud and halts the sale. Which evidence best strengthens the prosecution’s case against Jatin for forgery under Section 336?
(A) Data showing the sale caused no actual loss
(B) Testimony that the gallery consented to the sale
(C) Evidence that the painting had no market value
(D) Proof that Jatin knew the painting was a replica

View Answer  

Answer: (D) Proof that Jatin knew the painting was a replica
Explanation: The passage emphasizes that forgery under Section 336 requires the accused’s knowledge of the document’s falsity and intent to deceive. Proof that Jatin knew the painting was a replica strengthens the prosecution’s case.
Why other options are incorrect: (B) Consent is a defense, weakening the case; (C) Market value is irrelevant to intent; (A) Actual loss is not required for forgery.