Forgery in cheques

Your wife & her mother forged your cheques and filed 138 N.I. Act, case ,you file criminal case under section 420,  468 etc. if police do not register , you file Private criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. in the M.M. court. 

file a criminal petition under 340 crpc in the court asking the court to conduct investigation stating that a crime under 193 IPC had taken place and court will take cognisance of that and will do the investigation.

agreed with both experts above.

agree with experts

Case u/s 340 is not that easy- every body claims and rare suceed.

PLEASE GO THROUGH IQBAL SINGH landmark citation in this matter.

It is your cheque from your bank account so you have to prove how you have parted its custody.

Forgery and cheating will be if you also claim that it is not signed by you all other stories are defficult to prove.

340 crpc is requesting court to investigate matter for false evidence  and perjury, on investigation if the court finds prima facie misgivings with relates  to evidence provided in the court it shall order for enquiry under section 195 (1)(b)(II)

SUPREME COURT HAS GIVEN DEFINATION OF PERJURY as per section 340 that it should have been committed during the TRIAL  that is CUSTOGIA LEGIS.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Iqbal Singh Marwah and Anr.

25. In view of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that Sachida Nand Singh has been correctly decided and the view taken therein is the correct view. Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. would be attracted only when the offences enumerated in the said provision have been committed with respect to a document after it has been produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court i.e. during the time when the document was in custodia legis.

respected sir, the entire IQBAL SINGH MARWAH vs MEENAKSHI MARWAH, was based on a forged will, which was tried by MR.IQBAL, to probate and was challenged by MRS.MEENAKSHI MARWAH, and in this case the said forgery had taken and it was placed as evidence on record for probation, and the same was challenged by the MRS,MEENAKSHI MARWAH stating that it was forged. as per ur version, it was not produced at the time of trial it was produced much before. the paragraph u have quoted is only observations and not judgement in this case, and judgement had gone in favour MRS.MEENAKSHI MARWAH, were she was stating the will is forged from the begining, and have been placed as evidence. correct me if i am wrong.

What is the liability she is stating in her 138 complaint ??  

Coming to the main point : Perjury is false testimony under oath, so it has to be during court proceedings, and Supreme Court could not have defined this in Iqbal Singh Case. The order is very clear and it states:

1. Cases under S.195 CrPC has a specific procedure mentioned in S.340 CrPC, that is the court, which faced the false testimony, has to make the complaint under S.340 CrPC, the complaint must come from the court itself not from the individual.

2. For all the offenses like forging of documents etc, before it is produced to the court, S.195 CrPC cannot be invoked, a simple private complaint will do the job.

The difference is in this case if we presume that the cheque was forged by the wife/inlaws, then court cannot invoke any thing under S.195, the husband can lodge a private complaint under relevant section of IPC.

Moreover S.340 CrPC is not limited to documents alone, many a times it is seen that complainant makes two statements in his examination in chief and during cross examination, which on bare reading will prove that one of them is a lie. If this has material value to the case, then opposing party can move application under S.340 CrPC.