The Supreme Court has revived a forgery prosecution arising from an allegedly altered municipal building plan, holding that the absence of the original document does not automatically defeat the case at the charge stage.
In Antonetto J D’Souza v Aldila Braganza, 2026 INSC 1032, the accused had been discharged after arguing that neither the original approved plan nor the alleged forged copy had been recovered. The court said forgery and use of a false document may be established through circumstantial and secondary evidence, subject to proof at trial.
A charge requires a grave suspicion supported by the record, not the evidentiary certainty needed for conviction. Investigative shortcomings may ultimately benefit the accused, but they do not justify terminating a prosecution that otherwise discloses a triable case. The High Court’s order was set aside and the magistrate was directed to proceed expeditiously.
