P (PLP)

AMIN AHMED, J.‑This rule was issued against the order of the Sessions Judge of Noakhali dismissing the appeal of the peti tioner against his conviction and sentence under section 465 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The prosecution case, inter alia, is that on the 8th of June, 1946, the petitioner executed a false kabuliyat in favour 'of the complainant's fuf ushashri, her minor grandson, the wife of the petitioner and the sister of the wife of the petitioner purporting to create some tenancy right in respect of lands belonging to the recipients of the kabuliyat in order to defraud the recipients. In the kabuliyat it was also recited that it was executed with the consent and approval of the recipients although the latter did not give their consent. The petitioner denied all the above allegations and was tried and convicted under section'465 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. As stated above, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed his appeal against the said conviction and sentence. It is argued by the learned Advocate appearing for the peti tioner that the conviction and sentence under section 465 of the Pakistan Penal Code are bad in law, as the petitioner cannot be convicted under that section for making a ‑false statement in the body of the document. Even if a false statement is related in the body of the document, the document being admittedly made or executed by the petitioner himself, he cannot be convicted of forgery. But he may be charged with an offence under some other section of the Pakistan Code. In our opinion, there is substance in this contention. Section 463 of the Pakistan Penal Code runs thus:‑ Whoever makes any false document or part of a document, with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, 6r to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery." Section 464 runs thus:‑A person is said to make a false docu ment‑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 he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed, or at a tune at which 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 be living 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, he does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration." The first essential' ingredient of the offence of forgery is the "making of a false document or part of it" and the other elements are that such document should be made with intent to (i) cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, or (ii) support any claim or title; or (iii) cause any person to part with property; or (iv) enter into any express or implied contract; or.(v) commit fraud or that fraud may be committed. To start with have to see whether in this case, a false document has been made in the sense contem plated by the section relating to forgery. It is then and then alone that we can look for the other elements. In the present case the petitioner admits the execution of the document. All that he does is to state in the document that what he does he does with the approval and consent of the party concerned arid the latter is not true but he does not execute the document on behalf of that party, nor does he purport to sign as an agent of that party. So, so far as the making of the document is concerned, it cannot be said that he has made a false document. It has been held in a number of Qasas that the making of a document or a part of a document does not mean writing or printing it but it means signing or otherwise executing it. The fact that the word "makes" is used in section 464 Pakistan Penal Code in conjunction with the words "signs", "seals' or 'executes', or makes any mark denoting the execution of a document, seems to denote that this is the true meaning of the word 'make'. The result, therefore, is that this rule is made absolute and the conviction and sentence of the petitioner are set aside but the case is remanded for re‑trial by the Magistrate on framing appropriate charge on the facts of the case against the accused. We direct that the petitioner will continue on the bail. AFZAL, J.‑I agree. K.. M. A./ A. H. Retrial ordered.