1) IO is liable to be prosecuted for having forged documents , evidences etc

2) mere adverse entry is not sufficient punishment

1. He is liable to be prosecuted if he has committed forgery.

2. On the basis of the adverse entry for forgery the IO can surely be prosecuted for the offence of forgery under Section 468 and 471 IPC.

3. You don't get case laws on these points.

LAW IS AN ART, NOT A SCIENCE, it takes effort and time to establish that the complaint filed against you is a false one and the police has willfully registered the FIR. Any abuse of power or negligence of duty will amount to a breach of discipline, civil wrong or a crime and the police officer is liable to be punished.Filing a false FIR is a punishable offence under Section 182 and Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code. Also prosecute the false informant or complainant under Section 500 of the I.P.C. for defaming you.

If police has filed a false FIR intentionally,

1. File a petition before high court to quash the FIR.

2. Then file a complaint against the police before the court / Police complaining authority

But its your duty to prove they lodged a false FIR and fabricated/ forged documents

1. The public servant is not at all immune for commission of offence.

2. However if it is shown that he committed it in discharge of his pubic duty then a prior sanction under section 197 crpc is required.

3. So for forging the document a complaint can surely be lodged against this police man and FIR should also be registered.

4. If not then the same can be done through a petition under section 156(3) crpc.

Hello

Using forged documents to bolster a case, and using documents to make a car against someone or to help acquit hin is illegal and the IO will be proceeded against.

Departmentalenquiry and proceedings will ne initiated against him. Also the person who was convicted because of the IOs false documents and testimonies will also lodge a case against him. The criminal proceedings are different from departmental proceedings and the department could lodge an FIR and proceed against him along with the departmental enquiry.

Regards

The section 196 to 200 of IPC do not categorise between the public and the government office so any offence under the section committed by any person is liable to be punished

Sir the IO has to be tried and punished for the offence of the forgery and presenting false evidence before the court. That a FIR has to be lodged and from the permission of the concerned authority a prosecution has to be launched against IO.

Dear Client,

If documents are forged to fraud some person than effected victim can file FIR agasint him otherwise just to botched up the investigation act has been done than internal inquiry.

Prosecution u/s 182 , 211 IPC.

1) U/S 463 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, or 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.

2) U/S 465 Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

for further reference kindly read Chapter 18 of the Indian Penal Code and you shall have clarity regarding the forgery committed.

3) The police officer is suspended from duty until the case is not decided and also the department inquiry is on.

You can file FIR against the said officer. They will object in court for sanction to proceed against the said officers but you can claim that they have not done their said offences under discharge of their regular duties

There is no doubt that investigating officer is an important witness in a criminal trial who may clarify the process of investigation including the conclusion drawn by the prosecution. Every case has its own facts. In some cases, investigating officer is a very material witness where he collected evidence apart from statement of complainant and the material witnesses.

There are multiple sections in Indian Penal Code (IPC) to punish false statements, fabricated/forged evidence, perjury etc.; but rarely do such provisions are utilized to punish those abusing and misusing the judicial system.

The underlying cause why judges don’t punish, punish enough, or punish often enough for false allegations and evidence, could also be because of the legal provisions themselves. IPC and CrPC has provisions to punish these, but they are not being used in real life, so we need to analyse properly the provisions in Indian law.

IPC Chapter XI already contains provisions for punishing false evidence, false cases etc.

Section 191: Giving false evidence

Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth, or being bound by law to make a declaration upon any subject, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, is said to give false evidence.

Problems: Only those lies which are made on oath are considered as a crime under this section, so effectively it gives a wide loophole for anyone to make a false complaint, false petition/pleadings; and the accused/defendant will have to run around in police, courts, to raise a proper defence. Only after evidence stage, this section becomes useful.

Section 192: Fabricating false evidence;

Problems: Prima-facie there doesn’t seem to be problem, except of course that this is something again which can be proven only after evidence/cross-exam stage; which stage may get delayed for years in Indian courts..