The court rules that attesting a document does not imply knowledge or involvement in criminal acts, leading to the quashing of charges against the accused.
In a significant judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has quashed the charge sheet against Tadiboyina Narendra Kumar and another, who were accused merely as attesting witnesses in a criminal case. The court underscored that attesting a document does not imply knowledge of its contents or involvement in any alleged criminal acts. The case, brought before the court in Criminal Petition No. 9878 of 2022, questioned the liability of attesting witnesses in a forgery and fraud case.
The petitioners, labeled as Accused Nos. 8 and 9, were implicated in the charge sheet filed in C.C. No. 546 of 2018, based on allegations under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including forgery and criminal conspiracy. The charge sheet alleged that they attested a Gift Deed concerning a property transaction, which was executed with fraudulent intent by the main accused.
However, the petitioners contended that there were no specific allegations against them apart from their role as attesting witnesses. The court, presided over by Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedela, agreed with the petitioners, emphasizing that merely attesting a document does not constitute knowledge or participation in the crime.
Justice Gedela relied on established legal principles that distinguish the role of attesting witnesses from that of the primary accused. The court referenced several precedents, including the landmark decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, which outlined circumstances under which criminal proceedings could be quashed. The judgment reiterated that attesting witnesses cannot be held liable solely based on their attestation unless there is independent evidence indicating their involvement in the alleged crime.
The court's decision to quash the proceedings against the petitioners aligns with the legal stance that attestation does not imply endorsement or consent to the contents of the document. This judgment is seen as a significant affirmation of the legal protection afforded to individuals who serve merely as witnesses to document execution.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court's ruling is expected to have broader implications, potentially influencing similar cases where attesting witnesses are wrongfully implicated. The judgment underscores the importance of distinguishing between the roles of various parties in legal transactions and ensuring that liability is assigned appropriately based on evidence and involvement.
Bottom Line :
Attesting witnesses to a document cannot be held liable for the alleged offences solely based on the act of attestation unless independent evidence establishes their knowledge or involvement in the alleged crime.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 120(b), 468, 471, 420, 447 read with 34; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482
Tadiboyina Narendra Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (Andhra Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2965121
